Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Glasgow Corporation Bill,

Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation Bill, Rotherham Corporation Bill,

Lords Amendments considered, pursuant to the Order of the House of 25th July, and agreed to.

Leicester Corporation Bill [Lords],

Read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Bootle Corporation Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered.

Ordered,
That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the Third time."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Boston Corporation Bill [Lords],

As amended, to be considered Tomorrow.

London United Tramways Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time.

Redcross Street Burial Ground (Bristol) Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered.

Ordered,
That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the Third time."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

River Lee (Flood Relief, etc.) Bill [Lords] (Certified Bill),

As amended, considered; read the Third time (pursuant to the Order of the House of 11th December), and passed, with Amendments.

West Hans Corporation Bill [Lords] (Certified Bill),

As amended considered; Amendments made; Bill read the Third time (pursuant to the Order of the House of 11th December), and passed, with Amendments.

London County Council (Improvements) Bill [Lords],

To be read a Second time upon Wednesday.

Churches and Universities (Scotland) Widows' and Orphans' Fund Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],

Read the Third time, and passed, without Amendment.

EAST INDIA (BUDGET).

Address for "Return of the Budget of the Governor-General of India in Council for 1930–31."— (Mr. Benn.)

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

PRISONERS.

Mr. DAY: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has any information with reference to any persons who are at present in prison without trial in India under Regulation 111 of 1818; and will he give particulars?

The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Wedgwood Benn): The position is the same as it was when I answered a similar question by my hon. Friend on 5th May.

Mr. DAY: Can my right hon. Friend say whether the men who are detained have been accused of seditious activities in India?

Mr. BENN: I can give the hon. Member particulars if he will put down a question.

Mr. MARDY JONES: What is the reason why the right hon. Gentleman cannot give the names and the number of these persons?

Mr. BENN: The information as to the number was given, as I have stated in my answer of 5th May.

Mr. JONES: Can we have the names?

Mr. BENN: I will consider that point. The information is not asked for in the question.

KHASSADAR FORCE (CASUALTIES).

Earl WINTERTON: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for India if any casualties have been suffered by the Khassadar force in Waziristan; and if members of the force will be eligible for medals and decorations?

Mr. BENN: My reports show that there has been at least one casualty, but I have asked for further details. The rules do not definitely provide for
awards to members of the Khassadar forces, but this fact will certainly not exclude them from consideration.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT (AMENDMENT).

Earl WINTERTON: 4.
asked the Secretary of State for India if it is still the intention of the Government, before presenting proposals to Parliament for the amendment of the Government of India Act, to invite Parliament to refer these proposals to consideration by a Joint Committee of both Houses and to facilitate the presentation to that, Committee both of the views of the Indian Central Legislature by delegations, who will be invited to attend and confer with the Joint Committee, and also of the views of any other bodies whom the Joint Parliamentary Committee may desire to consult?

Mr. BENN: In the correspondence of October last between the Chairman of the Statutory Commission and the Prime Minister, which was published at the time, it was contemplated that the procedure by Joint Parliamentary Committee would still be appropriate for the examination of the proposals finally laid before Parliament as the result of the conference. The question whether it may be necessary or desirable to modify in any respect the procedure originally contemplated is one which the Noble Lord will no doubt agree it would be premature to consider until the results of the round-table Conference are known.

CASUALTIES (COMPENSATION).

Mr. OSWALD LEWIS: 5.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that when an Indian civilian was recently accidentally killed by a rifle bullet fired by a British soldier in the North-West Frontier Province the chief commissioner of the province immediately offered monetary compensation; and whether he will take steps to see that when British soldiers called out in aid of the civil authorities are killed by Indian civilians similar compensation is afforded in their case?

Mr. BENN: As I have already explained, the case of a soldier whose death is directly attributable to service wherever performed is treated in precisely the same way as that of a soldier
killed on active service, and the regulations already provide for awards to the dependants under certain conditions.

Mr. LEWIS: Am I to understand that, where the civil authorities are unable to keep order and British troops are called in to do so for them, the British taxpayer has to bear the burden of any compensation—

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member cannot expect to have an answer to that question.

ARMY COMMISSIONS (INDIAN STUDENTS).

Major GRAHAM POLE: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is now in a position to make a statement in regard to the attitude of the Government concerning the recommendation of the Indian Sandhurst Committee that suitable Indian students of British universities should be granted direct commissions in the Army, and that therefore the reopening of the Officers' Training Corps at the British universities should be proposed, any expense incurred in, such a step being borne, if necessary, by the Government of India?

Mr. BENN: I am afraid I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

SALT INDUSTRY (TARIFF BOARD INQUIRY).

Major POLE,: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether any decision has been arrived at by the Government of India in regard to the publication of the report of the Indian Tariff Board inquiry into the salt industry; and whether it is proposed to make public at the same time the views of the Government of India concerning the Tariff Board's recommendations?

Mr. BENN: I have not heard what the intentions of the Government of India are, but the procedure indicated by my hon. and gallant Friend is regularly followed in regard to reports of the Tariff Board.

MEDICAL DEGREES.

Major POLE: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether it is the intention of the Government of India to publish the proceedings of the Conference of Provincial Governments and Medical Faculties which was convened by the Government of India at Simla in June?

Mr. BENN: I have not heard whether the Government of India intend to publish these proceedings, but am inquiring.

PRESS ORDINANCE.

Mr. W. J. BROWN: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether the attention of the Government of India has been drawn by any of the news agencies or newspapers in India to the losses suffered by them owing to the promulgation of the Press ordinance; and if the Government of India have under consideration the question of making any compensation to a news agency or newspaper in India in view of losses so incurred?

Mr. BENN: No compensation is contemplated on account of the voluntary cessation of publication by newspapers whether as a protest against the Press ordinance or on failure to deposit security.

CONFERENCE.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for India if he can now give the House details of the composition of the British representation upon the round-table conference?

Mr. FREEMAN: 2.
asked the Secretary of State for India who will be the British and Indian representatives, or how they will be selected, to attend the roundtable conference on Indian affairs called for the autumn, and where it will be held?

Mr. BENN: The conference will be held at St. James's Palace at the conclusion of the Imperial Conference. I am not yet able to state what will be the composition of the delegations.

Mr. HARRIS: Will a statement be made before the House rises?

Mr. BENN: Yes.

Miss RATHBONE: Is the right hon. Gentleman considering the advisability of including some special representatives of Indian women as members of the Conference?

SITUATION.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether he will give the House the latest information he has as to the conditions in India?

Mr. BENN: I am circulating a statement of the Government of India's appreciation of the situation up to 26th July.

Following is the statement:

Appreciation of the situation by the Government of India up to 26th July, 1930.

1. North-West Frontier Province.

In Waziristan situation continues to improve. Preliminary settlements with Shabi Khel and Kikarai have been successfully concluded, these sections having given security in rifles for good behaviour and liquidation of any fine Government may impose. Shabi Khel Khassadars are now performing full duties again. Jirgas of other sections except Nazar Khel, who are procrastinating, have also come in with a view to settlement and are depositing rifles as security. The Razmak Brigade, which moved out to Tauda China on 10th July, in order more closely to support Scouts and Khassadars, after some fighting in that neighbourhood with hostile gatherings, which it dispersed, advanced to Ladha on 23rd July. The march up Baddar Valley was carried out successfully with very little opposition, and presence of column in Ladha area is producing good effect in hastening submission of hostile sections already severely shaken by continuous air action. Baddar stream has been in spate, but M.T. Convoys have successfully negotiated route to Ladha. Certain minor sections still remaining recalcitrant may have to be dealt with by further ground and air action; but latest reports show that Nazar Khel Jirga is coming in with view to settlement.

Peshawar Border.—Alingar Fakir continues his activities in Utman Khel country, north of Swat River. Utman Khel of Barang have refused to join him; but some of the Mahmund tribe have done so; and he appears to contemplate crossing to south of Swat River again. Air action will be taken against any part of his lashkar which does attempt to cross the river. Cavalry regiment has been moved to Tangi and levy posts in neighbourhood of Kot Totai have been strengthened.

Afridi jirga at Bagh on Friday 18th July was unusually strong and fully representative of all sections except Aka
Khel, Kamarai and Shipah, who attended in small numbers. Contingent of about 600 Orakzais was also present. Results of Political Agent's interview with jirga on 13th July were reported at gathering, and it was resolved that raids should be organised against Government pending compliance with tribes' demands. It was also decided that parties of Afridis should start at once to tour in Orakzai country and establish Afridi-Orakzai unity. In pursuance of this decision contingents of Afridis left for Orakzai country next day, and have been moving about in Orakzai country, enlisting so called "volunteers" and proclaiming intention to hold mass Afridi-Orakzai jirga near Khanki Bazaar on 25th July. Efforts are being made to bring in the Shiah Orakzais also and the Massozai and Alisherzai of Kurram agency. Aeroplane reconnaissances over Bara and Mastura valleys have been heavily fired at on several occasions during the week.

Internal.—Conditions on the whole continue to improve and number of under-trial and convicted persons of Peshawar District connected with recent agitation who have been released on giving satisfactory undertakings for the future now exceeds 180. There are some signs however, of revival of agitation in Utmanzai and Turangzai villages of Charsadda Tahsil, and meetings are being held again. On 22nd July Taroba village in Nowshera Tahsil was visited by armed gang of Hassan Khel of Jafaker, dressed in khaki. They represented themselves as Frontier Constabulary and summoned two villagers outside the village, where they shot them dead. It is believed that this was done in prosecution of inter-village feud.

In Bannu City picketing of liquor shops by women continues, and restrictions on ingress of villagers are being maintained. Rural situation in Bannu district also is somewhat less satisfactory, and carrying of arms by audiences at meetings is becoming more common. District Magistrate, as a precaution is calling in all government and licensed rifles in Bannuchi area.

2. In other parts of India there have been several clashes between the police and volunteers. These arose mainly out of picketing, but none were on a large scale. There has ben much activity in
several provinces in picketing of schools and colleges, and the object appears to be, not merely to prevent pupils and students from attending Government schools, but to obtain the boycott of all educational institutions with a view to obtaining more active recruits for the Civil Disobedience Movement. This form of activity varies much from place to place, and the success so far achieved has been limited. In Assam there have been several cases of schools being burnt down. The breach of Forest Laws has been removed in the Central Provinces and has begun in the Bombay Presidency.

The campaign against the payment of land revenue continues in Gujerat, but with this exception all local governments report that collections of land revenue and other Government dues are satisfactory. There is, however, apprehension in some provinces regarding the economic conditions created by the fall in the price of several agricultural staples. So far the monsoon has been favourable. Increased congress activity in the villages is reported by several provinces.

3. The general position in the provinces may be summarised as follows:

There has been a definite decline in the movement in Bengal, Madras, Behar and Orissa, Assam and Delhi; but in Bengal student activity may give fresh encouragement. In the Punjab there has been a marked improvement during the past month; but the Sikh situation is still unstable. The United Provinces report greater activity in the villages, both in regard to meetings and propaganda parties. In the Bombay Presidency, Gujerat continues to show signs of some improvement. The position in Bombay City is little changed, and attempts are now being made to win over Labour. The movement has had very serious effects on trade and business and the industrial outlook is gloomy. The movement has gained force in the Central Provinces, where it was late in establishing itself on a firm basis, and the situation there has definitely deteriorated. Viewing situation as a whole, there are some indications of weariness, and counter-propaganda is producing definite results.

4. The Viceroy's address to the Central Legislature on 9th July has been favour-
ably received in the Press and has undoubtedly strengthened Moderates in favour of constitutional methods. The economic evils of the Civil Disobedience Movement are attracting increased attention.

STATUTORY COMMISSION REPORT.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for India if the report of the Simon Commission is to be translated into the principal foreign and Indian languages?

Mr. BENN: As regards translation into Indian languages I am not yet in a position to add anything to the answer I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Gains-borough on 17th July, of which I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy. As to translation into European languages, careful inquiries which have been made through His Majesty's representatives in foreign countries as to the prospects of sales of such translations have shown that there is little or no prospect of such sales as would induce the publication of special translations by private commercial enterprise. Full commentaries on the report did of course appear at the time of its publication in leading world newspapers.

MR. GANDHI (INTERVIEW).

Captain PETER MACDONALD: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has any information as to the results of the recent interview with Mahatma Gandhi by Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru and Mr. Jayakar?

Mr. WELLOCK: 18.
asked the Secretary of State for India what progress has been made in the negotiations between Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru and Mr. Jayakar and Gandhi and other Congress leaders?

Mr. BENN: I regret that I am not in a position to make a statement.

Mr. BROCKWAY: May I ask whether it will be possible to arrange for a joint consultation between Mr. Gandhi, Pandit Motilal Nehru, and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, and the moderate leaders rather than being interviewed separately?

Mr. BENN: That is not really a matter for my decision here. It is a matter for the Indian Government.

Mr. BROCKWAY: Will the right hon Gentleman be prepared to inquire in India as to the possibility of such a conference?

Mr. BENN: I will note the hon. Member's suggestion and see that it is made known in the proper quarter.

Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOX: Would not an official conference with Gandhi while in prison be merely a confession of weakness on the part of the Government?

INDIAN ARMY (TRANSFERRED OFFICERS).

Lieut.-Colonel WINDSOR-CLIVE: 15.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that officers who, on transfer to the Indian Army, forfeited nine months' service for promotion only under Army Order VII, of 28th June, 1917, are being denied the increments of pay, to which they are entitled on completing 15 years' service, until they have completed 15 years and nine months' service; and, seeing that such action is contrary to the conditions laid down in the above-mentioned Army Order, will he look into the question?

Mr. BENN: If the hon. and gallant Member will allow me I will circulate a statement showing the practice and the reasons for it.

Following is the statement:

The terms of the Army Order of 1917 clearly stated the intention of the Order, which was that non-regular officers appointed direct to the Indian Army should not be more advantageously placed than officers appointed after nine months at Cadet Colleges. At that time promotion alone was in question, since pay was governed by rank without reference to length of service. Since then, increments of pay after 15 years' commissioned service have been introduced. To maintain the intention of the Army Order, it has been ruled that service for these increments should be reckoned in the same way as service for promotion, since otherwise officers appointed direct might be drawing more pay than officers from Cadet Colleges who have been graded as senior to them.

MR. KEITHAHN.

Mr. WELLOCK: 16.
asked the Secretary of State for India on what ground Mr.
Keithahn, an American missionary, was on or about 23rd June ordered to leave Madura by the Madras Government?

Mr. BENN: No, Sir, but I have asked for information.

Mr. WELLOCK: Is my right hon. Friend aware that Mr. Keithahn does not take any interest in politics, and that, although he is an admirer of Gandhi, his only offence has been to give shelter for one night to an Englishman; and is my right hon. Friend also aware that the missionary societies are very much concerned about this matter?

Mr. BENN: At my hon. Friend's suggestion I am making inquiries as to the facts.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (PUBLICITY).

Captain P. MACDONALD: 17.
asked the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the misconceptions prevalent in the United States of America with reference to the situation in India, be proposes to take any steps to give publicity in that country to the facts of the Indian situation?

Mr. BENN: The matter is under consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA.

SITUATION.

Sir KINGSLEY WOOD: 19
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give the latest information in his possession concerning affairs in China, including the position of the Customs at Tientsin and the position if the negotiations as to extra-territoriality; and whether the British subjects held to ransom have now been released?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Dalton): There has been no important change in the military situation. The Customs machinery set up at Tientsin by the Northerners appears to be working, but there is considerable dislocation of trade. As regards extra-territoriality, I have nothing to add to the reply given to the right hon. Gentleman on the 16th of July. His Majesty's Consul at Foochow has succeeded in evacuating a number of
British subjects from the interior, but I regret that the British subjects held to ransom have not yet been released.

Sir K. WOOD: Are further efforts to be made?

Mr. DALTON: Certainly. We are in constant communication with our representatives in China.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: Does the hon. Gentleman expect to be able to effect the release of these people before the House rises?

Mr. DALTON: I cannot say when we may hope to effect their release, but we shall leave no stone unturned to do so.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: Is it a question of ransom?

Mr. DALTON: Yes, Sir. Ransom is being demanded for these British subjects.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUSSIA.

PROPAGANDA.

Sir K. WOOD: 20.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he proposes before the end of the Session to make a statement concerning the progress of the investigation which is being made into questions relating to Soviet propaganda and other matters?

Mr. DALTON: This investigation has not yet been completed. I have, therefore, nothing to add to the answer given by my right hon. Friend on the 14th at July to the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Wood Green (Mr. G. Locker-Lampson) and the hon. and gallant Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall).

Sir K. WOOD: Will the hon. Gentleman say why it is impossible at any rate to make some interim statement so that the House can be satisfied that some steps are being taken?

Mr. DALTON: The investigation, as I have informed the right hon. Gentleman, is still continuing. My right hon. Friend in previous answers has stated that when the investigation is complete the Government will decide what action, if any, is to be taken and will inform the House of such action at the first opportunity.

Sir K. WOOD: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that this investigation has
been going on for months? Why cannot some report be made to the House?

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: Has not the investigation already made given the Government—[Interruption.]

Mr. SMITHERS: Is it not a fact that the delay in settling debts and claims is a policy of sheer humbug on the part of the Soviet?

TIMBER INDUSTRY (LABOUR CONDITIONS).

Mr. DOUGLAS HACKING: 23.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will instruct our representative in Soviet Russia to report upon the conditions of employment of those who are engaged in the production of timber within the Soviet Union?

Mr. DALTON: His Majesty's Ambassador has already furnished my right hon. Friend with reports on Soviet labour legislation, and the House was given the substance of these reports, as applying to the timber industry, in the reply to the question asked by the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Majoribanks) on the 7th of July.

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: Do the Government propose to take any action as a result of that investigation?

LENA CONCESSION (ARBITRATION).

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: 27.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now state the reasons given by the Soviet Government for its refusal to take part in the Lena arbitration?

Mr. DALTON: As the hon. Member is doubtless aware, statements of the Soviet Government's attitude in this matter appeared in the Press on the 13th of May last; and my right hon. Friend is not in a position to add anything to those statements.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Will the hon. Gentleman ever be able to give an answer to this question?

Mr. DALTON: This particular case is still sub judice.

DEBTS AND CLAIMS.

Mr. HACKING: 29.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Anglo-Soviet committee appointed for the purpose of discussing Russia's debts
to this country has yet held its first meeting; and, if not, when he expects it will be called together?

Mr. DALTON: According to present arrangements, the first meeting of this committee will be held on the 2nd of October.

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: What is the reason for this great delay, having regard to the urgency of the matter and the fact that the other committee is still in session?

Mr. DALTON: I suspect that some members on the British side at any rate are looking forward to having their summer holidays.

M. MOSES ROISENMAN.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: 70.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the police authorities are now in possession of information that M. Moses Roisenman, Chief of the Foreign Section of the Soviet Secret Police, recently arrived in this country; and if he can state whether he is still here or has left this country?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Short): My right hon. Friend has no such information, but if the hon. and gallant Member is in possession of trustworthy information in this matter, my right hon. Friend will be grateful if he will communicate it to him.

Sir F. HALL: Has the Home Secretary been in communication with the Scotland Yard authorities, and are the Scotland Yard authorities satisfied that the gentleman referred to in the question has not been here?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member had better put that question down.

Sir F. HALL: I would not have put down this question unless I was aware of the facts and was satisfied. Therefore, I beg to press the hon. Gentleman to reply to the question.

Mr. SHORT: The hon. and gallant Gentleman must put down a question, but, as far as my right hon. Friend is concerned, we have no information at all.

Sir F. HALL: Has the Home Secretary inquired from the Scotland Yard authorities? That is my question.

EGYPT.

Sir K. WOOD: 21.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give the latest information in his possession concerning affairs in Egypt; the number of casualties to date; and whether he can give any account of damage to property and the nature of any of the further steps taken to protect foreign nationals?

Mr. DALTON: The High Commissioner reported on the 23rd of July that all was quiet, and no further disturbances have since taken place. The total casualties reported since the 15th of July are police, 279 wounded; others, 26 killed and 204 wounded, including the figures quoted in the reply to the hon. Member for Kidderminster on the 21st of July. The only serious damage to property reported since my right hon. Friend's reply to the right hon. Gentleman on the 23rd of July is the setting fire to the municipal stables at Port Said. In view of the disturbances at these ports His Majesty's Ship "Ramillies" has proceeded to Port Said and His Majesty's Ship "Waterhen" to Suez; His Majesty's Ship "Queen Elizabeth" remains at Alexandria.

Sir K. WOOD: Has the hon. Gentleman received any information as to the meeting of the so-called Parliament yesterday or the day before?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that foreign nationals are being given adequate protection, and have any instructions been given to the British Army in Egypt?

Mr. DALTON: Yes, Sir; we are satisfied that foreign nationals are receiving all the protection that is called for in the circumstances. I am very glad to say—and I hope my satisfaction will be shared by all parties in the House—that it has been considered unnecessary to call upon the British troops in Egypt to take any part in the recent disturbances.

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: 25.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if
he can state the number and position of the British military establishment guarding the Suez Canal?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Sanders): I have been asked to reply. The main raison d'etre of the British military establishment in Egypt is this safeguarding of the Suez Canal. Approximately 10,000 troops compose this establishment and their peace stations are Cairo, Alexandria, Ismailia and Port Said.

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: 26.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he has received from, or sent to, Nahas Pasha any further communication?

Mr. DALTON: No, Sir.

Colonel GRETTON: 24.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why he instructed the High Commissioner to inform Nahas Pasha that the British Government holds him responsible, together with the Government of Egypt, for any acts of violence which may be perpetrated against foreign subjects in Egypt?

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: 30.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the Government took the course of holding the leader of a political party in Egypt jointly responsible with the head of the Government for the protection of the lives and property of foreigners?

Mr. DALTON: In view of their ultimate responsibility for the protection of foreign lives and property in Egypt, and the danger to public order which had manifested itself, His Majesty's Government considered it necessary to hold strictly to account the leaders of both parties in the present constitutional conflict in Egypt. His Majesty's Government's communication was intended, by dealing in practical manner with the situation, to make this unmistakably clear.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: Are the Government aware of any precedent, for taking this course, of holding the leader of a party not in office responsible for what happens in his country?

Mr. DALTON: There may not be a precedent for the action that we have taken, but that does not prove that the action was not well advised. The person in question is the leader of a large majority in the Egyptian Parliament.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: What do the Government mean by the words "ultimate responsibility"? How do they know what the responsibility in the future may be?

Mr. DALTON: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman has not understood what I had in mind in using the word "ultimate." The immediate responsibility rests with the Egyptian authorities. If they fail, the ultimate responsibility rests with us.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that Nahas Pasha has given an adequate response?

TOURIST TRAFFIC (AMERICAN SUBJECTS).

Mr. HACKING: 28.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state the number of British visas attached to American passports at the British consular office in New York during June this year; and how this figure compares with that of June, 1929?

Mr. DALTON: The number of visas issued at the British Passport Control Office at New York in June, 1930, was 16,410, as against 14,650 in June, 1929.

Mr. HACKING: Is not this very satisfactory increase largely due to the activities of the Travel Association of Great Britain and Ireland, whose duty it is to advertise this country?

Mr. DALTON: It would be difficult for me to give any reason with certainty for this increase, which affords ground for much satisfaction. But the fact that the right hon. Gentleman is associated with my hon. Friend the Secretary of the Overseas Trade Department in connection with the association to which he has referred is a guarantee to all sections of the House that its work is being well carried out.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

FAR EAST ECONOMIC MISSION.

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN-DOYLE: 31.
asked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether the trade mission to the Far East will include India in their itinerary; and, if not, whether,
in view of the falling off of British trade there, he will cause the scope of the misision to be extended?

Mr. GILLETT (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): In view of the importance and scope of the work of the mission and the time required to visit China and Japan it is not possible to include a visit to India.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: In view of the importance of this matter, will the hon. Gentleman suggest to the Government the necessity of reconsidering it?

Mr. GILLETT: As I say, it is quite impossible for this mission to go to India, but, if the hon. Member thinks that there is any need for another mission to go to India, I shall be glad to hear from him his reasons and any information which he may have on the subject.

Sir F. HALL: Would it not cause unnecessary expense to send another mission to India?

AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY (EXPORTS TO RUSSIA).

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: 60.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value of exports of agricultural machinery of United Kingdom manufacture to Soviet Russia to cover the period from 1st November, 1929, to 30th June, 1930?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. W. R. Smith): The total declared value of the exports of agricultural machinery and parts thereof manufactured in Great Britain and Northern Ireland and registered during the period from 1st November, 1929, to 30th June, 1930, inclusive, as consigned to the Soviet Union (Russia) amounted to £14,527.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Is there any prospect of increasing this amount considerably?

Mr. ARTHUR MICHAEL SAMUEL: In view of the trivial amount, will the hon. Member allow some inquiry to be made in Lincoln? Will he consult the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. R. A. Taylor?

COTTON INDUSTRY (RATIONALISATION).

Mr. McSHANE: 64.
asked the Minister of Labour whether her attention has been called to the recent decisions of the representatives of cotton operatives in regard to the rationalisation of that industry, and in particular to their demand that all operatives displaced by that policy should receive compensation; and whether she proposes to take any action in this direction?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Lawson): No, Sir. So far as I aim aware, the conclusions reached by the operatives' representatives have not been officially announced.

Mr. McSHANE: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that a week ago the whole of their demands were publicly broadcast, and one of those demands was that if rationalisation took place, they should be compensated if they were displaced, and, this being a matter of public interest, should not they be entitled to consideration?

Mr. LAWSON: I am aware that this matter was published in the Press, but it has not yet been officially announced by the operatives' organisation concerned; consequently, we have no official information.

Mr. HERBERT GIBSON: Has anything been done for the extremely hard hit cotton areas in the country?

Mr. LAWSON: That is another matter altogether.

BOOT AND SHOE TRADE (RUSSIAN ORDER).

Mr. WOMERSLEY (for Captain GUNSTON): 32.
asked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether the Soviet delegation has placed with other British boot and shoe manufacturers the order for 3,000,000 pairs of footwear not accepted by the Northamptonshire boot and shoe manufacturers?

Mr. GILLETT: No, Sir, not so far as I am aware.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Noble Lord, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, made a statement in which he said that the order had been
placed, and will he tell me how the Noble Lord had the information if the hon. Gentleman has not?

Mr. GILLETT: I have no knowledge of the information on which the Noble Lord based his statement. So far as I am concerned, I know nothing about any order having been given.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: If I send the hon. Gentleman a newspaper report of the speech in which this statement is definitely made, will he make inquiries?

Mr. GOULD: Does my hon. Friend know that there are three distinct newspaper reports of that speech, all varying on that point?

TRADE FACILITIES Acts.

Mr. PALMER (for Mr. MILLS): 47.
asked the Prime Minister if he will consider the re-enactment of the Trade Facilities Acts?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): As my hon. Friend is aware, Part I of the Development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act, 1929, affords assistance to statutory public utility companies in this country either by way of guarantee as under the Trades Facilities Acts or, as an alternative, by way of grants in respect of interest payments. The reasons for not reviving a system of guarantees for ordinary companies were explained by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs during the course of the debates on the Development Act and I cannot usefully add to the statement then made. I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the Statement I refer to.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

EGGS.

Mr. DAY: 33.
asked the Minister of Agriculture the quantity and declared value of Chinese eggs in shell and not in shell imported into Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the 12 months ended to the last convenient date; what steps are being taken by his Department to improve the marketing of home-produced eggs; and what success any such action has met with?

Mr. PARKINSON (Lord of the Treasury): I have been asked to reply.
As the reply is necessarily long, I propose, with the permission of hon. Friend, to circulate it in the 0FFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. DAY: Can we have a statement as to the quantity of these eggs?

Mr. HANNON: Will the hon. Gentleman give the House some indication, before the reply is published, of the quantity of eggs, not in the shell, which comes into this country?

Following is the reply:

The imports of eggs from China into the United Kingdom during 1929 were as follows:

Quantity.
Declared value.




Great hundreds.
£


Eggs in shell
…
1,624,087cwts.
996,012


Eggs not in shell
…
787,890
3,636,668

The steps taken by my right hon. Friend's Department to improve the marketing of home produced eggs are generally well known as the National Mark Egg Scheme. A leaflet describing the scheme is being sent to my hon. Friend.

In reply to the last part of the question, the following results may he definitely attributed to the National Mark Scheme for eggs:—

(i) The statutory standard of weight and quality for home-produced eggs are now widely recognised and accepted.
(ii) The level of egg marketing technique has been greatly improved, especially in relation to candling, and methods of grading and packing.
(iii) National Mark eggs have secured the premier position above all other eggs in the large wholesale markets.
(iv) Largely through the establishment of National Mark Egg Central, Limited, a co-operative federation of the authorised packing stations, National Mark eggs have secured entry into quarters where previously dependence was largely placed upon imported supplies; this has favourably influenced the market for home-produced eggs generally.
(v) The distributive trades have recognised the advantages of standardised quality and packing, with continuity of supply, new offered by National Mark eggs.
23
(vi) The production of eggs in this country has been encouraged and the numbers of fowls on farms have largely increased accordingly.

CREDITS.

Mr. DAY: 34.
asked the Minister of Agriculture the amount of loans applied for to the Agricultural Mortgage Corporation under the Agricultural Credits Act, 1928, to date; and the amount of money advanced in respect of these various applications?

Mr. PARKINSON: As the reply is long and contains a number of figures I propose, with the permission of my hon. Friend, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

Applications for loans under Part I of the Agricultural Credits Act, 1928, received by the Agricultural Mortgage Corporation up to the close of business on Tuesday, 22nd July, 1930, were as follow:

£


Loans on Mortgage (3,011)
…
10,543,473


Improvement Loans (121)
…
135,537




£10,679,010

These applications have been dealt with as follow:




Loans completed.




£


Loans on Mortgage (1,721)
…
5,163,165


Improvement Loans (29)
…
11,820




£5,174,985

In addition, the following have been approved by the directors of the Corporation subject to the satisfactory completion of the formalities:




£


Loans on Mortgage (219)
…
1,002,745


Improvement Loans (19)
…
10,772




£1,013,517

The following have been rejected or withdrawn:




£


Loans on Mortgage (776)
…
2,392,495


Improvement Loans (66)
…
95,631




£2,488,126

Applications in connection with which the formalities (valuation, etc.) are not yet completed and which have yet to be considered by the directors of the Corporation are as follow:




£


Loans on Mortgage(295)
…
1,045,557


Improvement Loans (7)
…
5,647




£1,051,204

IMPORTED BUTTER (SALE).

Mr. HANNON: 35.
asked the Minister of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to cases in which imported butter is made up in English wrappers and sold to the public as English butter; and what measures are being adopted by his Department to secure that foreign butter shall be offered for sale to the public with the correct description of the country of origin?

Mr. PARKINSON: This matter has been receiving the close attention of my right hon. Friend for several months past. It is now understood than an application from certain home and Dominion butter interests for an Order to require the marking of imported butter may be expected shortly. When this application is received it will be referred to the appropriate committee for inquiry in accordance with the Statute.

Mr. HANNON: Will the hon. Gentleman represent to his right hon. Friend the necessity of taking steps, when the report is received, to ensure that butter sold in this country is branded with the name of the country of origin and to see that foreign butter is not substituted for British butter?

Mr. HARDIE: Is the butter put into these wrappers in this country, or in foreign lands?

Mr. PARKINSON: The matter is dealt with in the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926.

Mr. THORNE: Would butter made from imported milk be called English butter?

TOMATOES.

Mr. HORRABIN: 40.
asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is aware that during the month of June, 1930, 66,676 cwts. of tomatoes were imported into this country
from Holland as compared with 26,322 cwts. during the same month last year, and that the prices obtained by English growers were from 2d. to 3d. per lb. less this year than last; and whether he will take steps by means of import boards for fruit and vegetables to secure an economic price for the English grower?

Mr. PARKINSON: The quantities of tomatoes imported into the United Kingdom from Holland in June, 1930 and 1929, were approximately as stated in the question. The average wholesale price of English tomatoes in June last was about 2d. per lb. less than in June, 1929. The whole question of enabling the grower in this country to secure better prices for his fruit, vegetables and other produce is engaging the close attention of my right hon. Friend.

Mr. LEIF JONES: Is it not greatly to the advantage of English consumers that they should be able to get these tomatoes cheaply?

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Will the Minister do something in this matter; and will he be able to give a report upon it before the House again sits?

Mr. PARKINSON: That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

EDUCATION.

Mr. EDE: 38.
asked the Minister of Agriculture how many agricultural education committees have submitted during the past 12 months enlarged schemes of agricultural education for their areas; how many such schemes have been improved; and how many county agricultural committees have not yet submitted enlarged schemes?

Mr. PARKINSON: 51 counties have submitted schemes for an extension of agricultural education in their respective areas, all of which have been approved either as submitted or in some modified form. Two counties have enlarged schemes under consideration which have not yet been submitted to the Ministry. Six authorities have neither submitted schemes for development, nor (so far as the Ministry is aware) have at present any such schemes under consideration.

GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS.

Mr. GRANVILLE: 39.
asked the Minister of Agriculture if he intends to
announce any proposals before the Recess?

Mr. PARKINSON: My right hon. Friend is not in a position to make a statement on this subject at present.

WHITEHALL GARDENS.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 42.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he has received further representations requesting that the gardens at the rear of Whitehall Gardens should be devoted to the use of the public; and, if so, whether he can state the nature of his decision?

The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Lansbury): The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and the second part does not, therefore, arise.

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS (TIMBER AND LEATHER).

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 43.
asked the First Commissioner of Works what amount, if any, of timber produced within the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics has been used by his Department in the course of the last 12 months?

Mr. LANSBURY: The Department's standard specification in connection with softwoods permits the use by contractors of British Columbia Pine, Silver Spruce, Oregon Pine, Baltic and White Sea timbers of approved quality. No information is available as to what proportion, if any, of the timbers actually used by contractors comes from the source mentioned by the hon. Member.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman through his Department discover the places from which this timber comes; and, in view of the answer he has given in regard to other places, cannot he give the House some information in regard to Soviet Russia?

Mr. LANSBURY: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put down another question on the subject.

Mr. THORNE: Has your attention been called to the fact, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. Member for North Newcastle-on-Tyne (Sir N. Grattan-Doyle) has four questions on the Paper?

Major ROSS: 50.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether the sample morocco skin, to which supplies have to conform when tendering for upholstery to be used in the houses of Parliament, is made from a goat skin of Empire origin; and whether he will give an assurance that all leather used by the Office of Works shall in future be made from raw material originating from within the Empire?

Mr. LANSBURY: The exhibited sample is a skin of European origin. I am not prepared to give the assurance asked for in the latter part of the question, but my Department, when placing contracts, will in fact give preference to skins of Empire origin provided that they are up to sample standard and are prepared and finished in accordance with specification.

Major ROSS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the goat skin in question is of German origin, and does he want British goats to follow the example of German goats?

GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, EDINBURGH.

Mr. MATHERS: 44.
asked the First Commissioner of Works what decision has been reached regarding the employment of men on the work of his Department in Edinburgh; and whether he will take into direct employment those workers who have been engaged through contractors on that work?

Mr. LANSBURY: I regret that it has not yet been possible to arrive at a decision, but I will not fail to advise my hon Friend when the time arrives.

Mr. MATHERS: 53.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he has now reached an accommodation with the Corporation of Edinburgh regarding the design of the building to be erected upon the Calton Gaol site; whether the Fine Arts Commission or the corporation will have the deciding voice upon the present or any modified plans; when the erection of new buildings on the site will commence; whether he will state definitely if the Sheriff Court House will be included in the scheme; and if the last-named building will be capable of housing a Scottish Parliament?

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: 55
asked the First Commissioner of Works (1) whether he will make available to Members of this House the report of the Fine Arts Commission on the plans of the Office of Works for the Calton site, Edinburgh;
(2) whether he will make available to Members of this House and to members of the Scottish public photographs of a model of the proposed buildings on the Calton site, Edinburgh;
(3) whether, having regard to the division of opinion in the Edinburgh Corporation as to the proposed plans for the Calton site, Edinburgh, as shown by a vote of 32 to 17, with 22 abstentions, he will reconsider the attitude of his Department with a view to making the provision of plans for the works open to full competition?

Mr. LANSBURY: In view of the lengthy nature of the reply, I should like to circulate the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. E. BROWN: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, in view of the fact that this is one of the last chances the House will have before the Recess to raise the matter, that we should have the announcement in full now?

Mr. LANSBURY: I will read the reply: Within the last two days it has been represented to me that the corporation of Edinburgh approve in principle the first scheme prepared by my Department for Government buildings on the Calton Gaol site, Edinburgh. The corporation consider that the Sheriff Court House should be erected in the vicinity of the High Street.
It is quite clear that no other site but that of the Calton Gaol can be acquired within a reasonable time and, as it is essential that the Sheriff Court House shall be erected as early as possible so as to free the site of the present building at George IV Bridge for the extension of the National Library, the Government has decided that there is no alternative to putting the new Sheriff Court House on the Calton Gaol site.
From the previous report of the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland, I came to the conclusion that no scheme for a Sheriff Court House and for Public Offices containing sufficient accom-
modation for the staff for which it is necessary to provide is likely to meet with the approbation of the Commission. In view, however, of the representations of the Edinburgh Corporation, I am asking the Royal Commission whether, on reconsideration, there is, in their opinion, a reasonable prospect of obtaining a satisfactory architectural scheme on the lines of the original scheme and, if not, for their views as to the design and siting of a Sheriff Court building. On receipt of a reply it will be necessary to consider whether the proposal to erect Government buildings on the Calton Gaol site shall be proceeded with.
My Department is under covenant to obtain the approval of the Edinburgh Corporation to the plans, etc., of any buildings on the site in question, and will, in the future as in the past, avail itself of the advisory services of the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland in the preparation of the scheme. I am not prepared to make the designs of the buildings the subject of open competition.
The plans and model of the scheme now under reconsideration were prepared at a very early stage and represent merely the preliminary ideas. If they represented a finished design I should have been prepared to make them available to the Members of the House and, probably, to the public generally, but I have come to the conclusion, after careful consideration, that the publication of the designs and of the report of the Fine Art Commission would only be misleading. I can give the House an assurance that, in the event of a finished design being prepared, full publicity will be given to it at the stage when the plans are submitted to the Edinburgh Corporation.
I regret that, in the circumstances, I cannot state when the buildings will he commenced, but no avoidable delay will occur. I am not in a position to express any opinion as to whether the proposed Sheriff Court House would be capable of housing a Scottish Parliament.

Mr. MATHERS: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the illustration that is published in an Edinburgh newspaper, a copy of which I now hand to him, is a fair representation of the proposed new building that has received modified commendation from the Edinburgh Corporation, and if he thinks that
this building is in keeping with its surroundings?

Mr. LANSBURY: I cannot add anything to the answer I have given. As to the pictures that are being handed round, I do not know where they come from or anything about them.

Mr. BROWN: Before any final decision is taken to erect a building on modified plans, will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that it will be in Session, and that no decision will be taken before we meet again at the end of October?

Mr. LANSBURY: I am not sure that I am entitled to give that assurance. The answer to the hon. Member is that the late Government entered into an agreement with the Edinburgh Corporation that no buildings should be erected on that site except with their concurrence and approval. The present Government, through the Office of Works, have confirmed that agreement, and to that we hold. As to whether we should hold up any proceedings between now and the time when Parliament reassembles is a matter for consideration, on which I should not like to give an answer offhand.

Mr. BROWN: The right hon. Gentleman seems to object to these photographs. Is he aware that his Department refused to allow photographs to be taken of the actual model in the anteroom of the corporation buildings, when the decision was taken, and that therefore those who desired to let the public know had no option but to make sketches? Will the right hon. Gentleman now, in view of the great public feeling about this matter, in relation to this very important site, pledge himself that the Department will take no definite decision to build on plans until this House has had an opportunity to express its opinion?

Mr. LANSBURY: I am not responsible for the imagination of people. I think the hon. Member cannot have heard my reply. The reason, and the only reason, why we have not published any photographs of the drawings is quite simple; they are not complete, and they are being modified. When there is an agreement, we shall be only too pleased to hang them up in the Tea Room and also to publish them broadcast.

Mr. BROWN: I beg to give notice that, at the end of Questions, I shall ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the decision of the Government to erect unsightly buildings on the Calton site, Edinburgh.

Mr. LANSBURY: On a point of Order. The Government have decided on no buildings at present.

Mr. MACPHERSON: rose
—

Mr. SPEAKER: As the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) has given notice that he intends to move the Adjournment, we cannot pursue the matter further at the moment.

Sir PATRICK FORD: rose
—

Mr. SPEAKER: Mr. Mathers.

OLD AGE PENSIONS.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether he can now say anything further with regard to the proposals for increasing the amount of old age pensions in necessitous cases and/or lowering the age?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Miss Lawrence): I have been asked to reply. This matter is one which falls to be considered by the Cabinet Committee at present engaged in a general survey of the existing insurance and pensions legislation, and nay right hon. Friend will not be in a position to make any statement on the subject until this Committee has reported.

GOVERNMENT PROGRAMME (LEGISLATION).

The following Question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Sir ASSHERON POWNALL:
48. "To ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that, although the House has sat for over a year, the following Measures foreshadowed in the Gracious Speech from the Throne have not been passed into law: Bills dealing with factory legislation, with slum clearance, with the Trade Disputes Act, 1927, and with the Washington Convention; and whether, in considering the legislation to be introduced in the next Session, he will see it is confined to such Measures as it may be reasonably expected can be passed into law?

Sir A. POWNALL: The words "with slum clearance" ought to be deleted from this question.

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald): I hope that two of the Measures referred to in the hon. Member's question, namely, those dealing with Housing and Slum Clearance in England and Scotland will be passed into law before the end of the Session. As regards the other Measures, while the Government regret that they have not been able to, carry out their full programme, I would remind the House that throughout the Session, which is now drawing to a close, there has been no attempt to restrict discussion on any of the substantially important matters like the Finance Bill which have been brought before the House. With regard to next Session, the House will remember that it is proposed to set up a Select Committee to overhaul the whole question of Parliamentary procedure, and I can assure the hon. Member that His Majesty's Government will, while refraining from making excessive calls on the capacity of the House, do their best to attain at least the same standard of achievement as has been reached this Session.

Sir A. POWNALL: Is it not the case that, with the exception of the other Measure in connection with slum clearance, the Coal Mines Bill is the only important Bill passed in the last year; and is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with the legislative output of the Government?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should never be satisfied with anything, but there are two first-class Measures, and, if the hon. Member compares that record with previous records, he will find that he ought to be satisfied as well as me.

Major COLVILLE: Does the right hon. Gentleman retain his desire for the Trade Disputes Bill?

HADRIAN'S WALL.

Mr. HURD: 51.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether the Government will guarantee effective protection of the Roman Wall and its surroundings before amending legislation is introduced?

Mr. LANSBURY: As I have already explained to the House, the wall and the vallum are in no danger. The quarrying has not yet begun and as the House is aware, I have under preparation a Bill which will give adequate powers for the protection of the wall and the surroundings. It is unlikely that any appreciable amount of quarrying can be carried out before amending legislation is introduced.

Mr. HURD: May I take it that the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that all that is possible is being done in the interim?

Mr. LANSBURY: Yes, I am quite satisfied.

HOUSE OF COMMONS (VENTILATION).

Sir W. DAVISON: 52.
asked the First Commissioner of Works when the existing system of ventilation of the House of Commons was first installed; and when any alteration or improvement was last effected and in what respect?

Mr. LANSBURY: The existing system of ventilation in the House of Commons was first installed in 1854 and modified in 1892. A minor alteration was recently effected whereby the air inlets beneath the benches. have been covered with canvas.

Sir W. DAVISON: Have any of the streptococci been forcibly fed since this recent alteration; and was the result the same as before when they were fed on broth for some months and very largely propagated?

Mr. LANSBURY: The hon. Gentleman had better give me notice of these questions.

ARTHUR'S SEAT, EDINBURGH.

Mr. MATHERS: 54.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the risk of injury, especially to elderly people, attendant upon the climbing of Arthur's Seat in the King's Park, Edinburgh, owing to the slippery nature of the rock near the summit; and whether he proposes to take action to minimise the danger?

Mr. LANSBURY: I am informed that as there are several well-defined and easily negotiated tracks leading to and from
the summit, there is no need for visitors to climb over the rock. In these circumstances, it would not appear that any action on my part is necessary.

Sir W. DAVISON: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the propriety of having a kilt fitted to Arthur's Seat?

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

CONSTRUCITION.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 61.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the estimated cost during the period of the Treaty of maintaining our construction on the basis of the requirements mentioned in Command Paper 3620?

The CIVIL LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. George Hall): The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that Command Paper 3620 indicates with precision our requirements for naval construction over the period of the Treaty. On the contrary, it is there explained why His Majesty's Government were unable to put forward a programme of building to cover that period at the present time. As was stated in the reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) on 2nd July (OFFICIAL REPORT, col. 1941) any estimate of the sort could he neither accurate nor useful, as it would have to be based upon all sorts of assumptions for which there is at present insufficient warrant.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is my hon. Friend aware that his answer destroys the whole purpose of the White Paper, which lays down certain minimum requirements, and my question is, what will be the cost to the country if those minimum requirements are met?

Mr. HALL: I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to the latter part of paragraph 2 and to paragraph 3 of the White Paper, which he will see bears out what I stated in the reply to this question.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: On the ordinary average, will not the cost of building this programme be about £70,000,000?

DOCKYARD EMPLOYéS.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 62.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the one-in-eight rule was established in His Majesty's dockyards; what was the pre-
vious rule; how long it operated; and for what reason it was altered?

Mr. G. HALL: The answer to the first part of the question is 24th February, 1922. The previous rule was that one vacancy in two occurring on the Established List should be filled. It operated from the 2nd February, 1921. The reason for restricting the transfer of men from the Hired to the Established List was that owing to the large additions to the Established List made during the War and the heavy discharges (mainly from the Hired List) since the War, the proportion of Established men to the total numbers employed had become abnormally high.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Does not my hon. Friend think, now that the Treaty is signed, that one man should be established for every two vacancies at least?

Mr. HALL: The hon. Member must give us some little credit for having reviewed this matter within the last month. The position is somewhat improved from what it was previously.

CRUISER "LEANDER."

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 63.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the work on the new cruiser "Leander," to be built in Devonport dockyard, will be commenced?

Mr. G. HALL: Work on "Leander" commenced some time ago. It is anticipated that the ship will be laid down in September.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION.

CONVEYANCE OF CHILDREN.

Mr. GRANVILLE: 65.
asked the President of the Board of Education, if, in view of the unusually heavy charges falling upon county education authorities in respect of the conveyance of children rendered necessary under reorganisation schemes, he will consider making provision for the payment of increased grants in respect of the cost of conveyance of children?

Lieut.-Colonel WINDSOR-CLIVE: 66.
asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that his refusal to accede to the request of the County Council Association for an in-
creased grant in aid of the cost of conveyance of school children is likely seriously to prejudice the success of schemes of reorganisation as recommended by the Hadow Committee; and whether he is prepared to reconsider his refusal?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Morgan Jones): I would refer the hon. Members to the answer which my right hon. Friend gave last Thursday to the hon. Members for Barnard Castle (Mr. Lawther) and Bridgwater (Mr. CroomJohnson) a copy of which I am sending them.

SECONDARY EDUCATION (SCHOLARSHIPS).

Mr. SORENSEN: 67.
asked the President of the Board of Education the number of elementary school scholars who secured scholarships to secondary schools and who were unable to benefit thereby through the financial stringency of their parents and through the lack of accommodation?

Mr. MORGAN JONES: I regret that the information for which my hon. Friend asks is not available.

TRAVELLING LIBRARIES.

Mr. SORENSEN: 68.
asked the President of the Board of Education the total number of travelling libraries established by county authorities in England and Wales, and the number inaugurated during the past year?

Mr. MORGAN JONES: My right hon. Friend is afraid that he has no information other than that contained in the answer which he gave my hon. Friend on the 31st March last.

BRITISH ARMY (MARRIED QUARTERS, COLCHESTER).

Mr. OSWALD LEWIS: 69.
asked the Secretary of State for War what steps, if any, he proposes to take to increase the accommodation provided for soldiers on the married establishment in the Colchester district?

Mr. SANDERS: If the hon. Member is referring to the number of married quarters provided at Colchester, there is no occasion for an increase, since they approximately meet the requirements of the married quarters roll. If he is re-
ferring to the size of the quarters, as my right hon. Friend has already explained, the present proportion of the various sized quarters throughout the country was fixed after a census taken some years ago, and he has given instructions for fresh data to be collected in order to see whether any alteration in that proportion is desirable. That inquiry, which is a general one, must necessarily take some time. But apart from the general question, certain proposals for modernising some of the existing married quarters at Colchester are at present under consideration.

EXCAVATIONS, COLCHESTER.

Mr. THORNE: 72.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the excavations which are taking place in the Colchester district, under the supervision of a British Museum official, are being carried out with any financial assistance from the Government; and whether the relics which are being unearthed are intended to be placed in the British Museum or other museums?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The excavations in question are being carried out by the Colchester Corporation, in connection with the construction of a by-pass road. No cash assistance for this work is being given by the Government, but the British Museum are lending the services of one of their expert officials to supervise the work. The disposal of any relics discovered will be a matter for the Corporation to consider.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

RAILWAY SERVICE, ROMFORD AND UPMINSTER.

Mr. MUGGERIDGE: 74.
asked the Minister of Transport if travelling facilities from the City by the two railways from Liverpool Street and Fen-church Street to Romford and Upminster, respectively, are likely to be improved; and if he has information showing when the promised doubling or electrification on these overcrowded routes are expected to be completed?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Herbert Morrison): I understand that the London and North Eastern Railway Company are widening their line between
Romford Junction and Gidea Park, and that the London Midland and Scottish Railway Company are undertaking the widening and electrification of their line between Barking and Upminster. I hope that the execution of these works will enable the travelling facilities in these districts to be improved. I am consulting the railway companies as to the probable date of their completion and will inform my hon. Friend of their reply.

Mr. MUGGERIDGE: Is my hon. Friend aware that the travelling public on these lines is increasing every month, that a huge amount of property is going up in this district, and that travelling is getting very bad; and will he use the utmost pressure he can on the railway companies to secure some relief?

Mr. MORRISON: Certainly, I am aware of the very grave difficulties that exist, and the hon. Gentleman may be sure that I will do all that I can, but he will understand that the railways are not yet nationalised.

Mr. MUGGERIDGE: Will the hon. Gentleman threaten them with nationalisation?

ELECTRICITY CHARGES.

Mr. OLDFIELD: 75.
asked the Minister of Transport the position with regard to the proposals for securing greater uniformity in respect of charges and tariffs in the electricity supply industry, and for providing facilities for assisted wiring and the hire of apparatus?

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON: The reports of the two Committees set up by the Electricity Commissioners to consider the question's referred to by my hon. Friend were placed on sale to-day.

COMMON LANDS.

Mr. EDE: 36.
asked the Minister of Agriculture how many applications for the enclosure of common lands under the Law of Property Act, 1925, are now before him; the acreage concerned; the number of decisions given on similar applications since 1st January, 1930; the acreage concerned in these decisions; and whether, in any such decision, an enclosure was sanctioned without the addition of an area of land to the common equivalent to that enclosed?

Mr. PARKINSON: The number of applications for the inclosure of common lands under Section 194 of the Law of Property Act, 1925, now before the Ministry is three, affecting altogether nine acres of land; the number of decisions given on similar applications since 1st January, 1930, is 12, affecting altogether 28 acres of land. In 10 of these cases the Ministry sanctioned inclosure without requiring the addition of an area of land to the common equivalent to that inclosed, as in all the circumstances of these cases the Ministry did not consider that any such requirement was necessary. The total area affected in these 10 cases was two roods 16 perches only.

Mr. EDE: 37.
asked the Minister of Agriculture if he proposes to promote legislation next Session for the more effective control and preservation of common lands?

Mr. PARKINSON: My right hon. Friend is unable at this stage to say whether it will be possible to arrange for the introduction of early legislation dealing with commons.

HOUSING (HUTS, WELLING).

Mr. PALMER (for Mr. MILLS): 49.
asked the First Commissioner of Works if he is aware that Government documentary ledgers containing the names, addresses, and length of residence of each tenant residing on the temporary hutments built during 1916–1918 by His Majesty's Office of Works are now being used by the individuals who bought this property in 1928 as evidence in the County Court of Dartford against tenants in order to raise rents; and what steps he proposes to take to recover these Government documents or whether they were handed over without any agreement or protection of tenants at the then existing rents?

Mr. LANSBURY: I am not aware that the purchasers are holding any official documentary ledgers which should be in the possession of my Department. The property was sold subject to the rights of the tenants.

Mr. DAY: Has the right hon. Gentleman made any inquiries about these ledgers?

Mr. LANSBURY: I should not have given the answer if I had not made inquiries.

MATERNITY WELFARE.

Mr. AYLES (for Mr. Freeman): 58.
asked the Minister of Health whether he can now state the approximate cost of providing a national maternity service covering the services of a doctor, midwife, and anæsthetic administration?

Miss LAWRENCE: My right hon. Friend is unable to add anything to the answer given to my hon. Friend on the 1st July.

POST OFFICE (WELSH CABLEGRAMS).

Dr. MORRIS-JONES (for Mr. HADYN JONES): 59.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the cablegram Hir oes hapus Glaslwyn, Corwen, despatched at 4.30 p.m. on the 17th instant from Corwen Post Office to Canada was refused transmission by London; whether he is aware that the grounds for refusal were that Welsh was not accepted, but that if it was sent in for transmission in English or French it would be sent off; and will he state why a wire in Welsh is prohibited when a message in a foreign language or in code is accepted?

The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Viant): The telegram to which the hon. Member refers was tendered for transmission to Canada by the deferred service at a reduced rate of charge. This service is available only for telegrams written in English or French. The choice of language is restricted in this way in order that telegraph clerks in this country and Canada may be able to satisfy themselves that deferred telegrams do not contain code words, which, under the International Telegraph Regulations, are not admissible in the deferred service.

Dr. MORRIS-JONES: May I ask whether it is the policy of the Government to give preference to a foreign tongue over a tongue which is spoken in this country by more than 1,000,000 of His Majesty's subjects?

Mr. VIANT: I can assure the hon. Member that no prejudice has been
shown in this matter. The Regulation which is embodied in the reply, given to the question is one which was arrived at by international agreement.

Dr. MORRIS-JONES: Will the hon. Member tell his Department that this language has been spoken in this country for hundreds of years longer than the English tongue?

Sir P. FORD: Is it not a fact that rather too much time has been given to a small Welsh question?

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: In considering this question, will the hon. Member bear in mind that the Irish language is many hundreds of years older than the Welsh language?

Mr. MORRIS: Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this question at the earliest opportunity.

GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, EDINBURGH.

Mr. E. BROWN: I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely:
the decision of the Government to erect unsightly buildings on the Calton site, Edinburgh.

Mr. SPEAKER: This question does not come within the terms of the Standing Order, and therefore I cannot allow the hon. Member to move the Adjournment.

Mr. BROWN: May I point out that the First Commissioner of Works has refused to give an assurance that a decision on a modified plan will not be taken during the Recess? May I urge that that should have some weight with you? Otherwise, the only opportunity we shall have of raising this matter is on the Appropriation Bill, which is not an effective opportunity.

Sir P. FORD: May I point out to you, Sir, that when you very properly refused to allow further questions on this subject it was on the understanding that we should have an opportunity of raising the question on the Adjournment?

Mr. SPEAKER: I certainly did not say any such thing.

Sir P. FORD: Then I apologise, Sir.

Mr. LANSBURY: Will you allow me to say to the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) and to the hon. Baronet that neither the Department nor the Government have any idea of flouting the opinion of the House, and as it is a matter of only three months, and perhaps a little less, I am quite willing to give the hon. Member the assurance he asks on the subject.

Mr. BROWN: I thank the right hon. Member.

PRIVILEGE.

Earl WINTERTON: I beg to move:
That the speech of the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division of Lancashire, reported in the 'Manchester Guardian' newspaper in Monday, 28th July, 1930, is a gross libel. upon honourable Members of this Mouse and is a grave breach of its Privileges.
In rising to call Attention to this matter of Privilege, I ought to say at the outset that, in accordance with the usual custom of the House, I have given notice to the hon. Member who is concerned of my intention to raise it this day. The House will appreciate that it is necessary for me, under the Rules of the House, to move my Resolution to-day, but, in the event of the hon. Member not being present, then, in accordance with the usual custom, the Leader of the House can move to adjourn the debate. I propose to use the very minimum of words in recommending this Resolution to the House. My first duty is to quote the words which I claim are a gross breach of Privilege. The paper from which I quote is the "Manchester Guardian" of to-day:
Mr. E. Sandham, M.P. addressing the half-yearly conference in Manchester on Saturday of the Number 9 Divisional Council of the Independent Labour Party, of which he is the chairman, made some remarkable charges against Labour Members of Parliament, in the course of a reference to the recent Mace incident in the House of Commons.
The sheer, stupid tradition of this ghost-house"—
be proceeded—
has got most of the Members in its deadly grip. Labour Members can receive bribes to help to pass doubtful Bills in the interests of private individuals; Labour Members can get stupidly drunk in this place; but none of these things are against the sacred traditions of the House; in fact, they are in keeping with them.
It is known that Labour Members accepted money from moneylenders and other interests, and it is known that Labour Members of Parliament get drunk in the House. Our leaders see nothing wrong in that, or, at any rate, such conduct is not bad enough to create a demand for their expulsion.
Then the hon. Member goes on to refer to an incident which occurred a week or 10 days ago. It is quite obvious that the gross charge made in this statement is that of bribery. The House has never allowed one of its Members, or anyone outside, to make such a charge, and, as I state in the words of my Motion, I believe the charge made constitutes a gross libel. I think that belief is shared by all of us in whatever part of the House we may sit. It is really unnecessary for me to say anything more except to intimate, through the usual channels, that the Leader of the House will probably move an Amendment to my Resolution to refer this matter to the Committee of Privileges. So far as I am concerned, I have no objection to such a course.

Mr. SPEAKER: Mr. Sandham.

The PRIME MINISTER: I beg to move. "That the Debate be now adjourned."
As the hon. Member for Kirkdale (Mr. Sandham) is not present, and in order

to give him an opportunity of being present as he ought to be, I think it is right that I should move "That the Debate be now adjourned."

Sir WILLIAM MITCHELL-THOMSON: Is it not in accordance with the usual practice that you, Mr. Speaker, should cause a direction to reach the hon. Member for Kirkdale (Mr. Sandham) to attend in his place to-morrow?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Kirkdale will be notified.

Sir AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Ought there not be a Motion for the hon. Member to attend?

Mr. SPEAKER: No; in this case that is not necessary.

Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House).—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 212; Noes, 124.

Division No.462.]
AYES.
[3.54 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Chater, Daniel
Hardle, George D.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John H.
Harris, Percy D.


Add[...]son, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Cove, William G.
Hayday, Arthur


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Dagger, George
Hayes, John Henry


Alpass, J. H.
Dalton, Hugh
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Ammon, Charles George
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Arnott, John
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Herriotts, J.


Asks, Sir Robert
Day, Harry
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, south)


Ayles, Walter
Duncan, Charles
Hoffman, P. C.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Ede, James Chuter
Hopkin, Daniel


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Edmunds. J. E.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie


Barnes, Alfred John
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Horrabin, J. F.


Barr, James
Eimley, Viscount
Hudson, James H.(Huddersfield)


Bellamy, Albert
Foot, Isaac
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, upton)
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Gibbins, Joseph
Isaacs, George


Benson, G.
Gibson, H. M.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Gill, T. H. (Lancs. Mossley)
Johnston, Thomas


Blindell, James
Gillett, George M.
Jones, F. Llewellyn-(F[...]nt)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gossling, A. G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Bowen, J. W.
Gould, F.
Jones, Rt. Hon Le[...]f (Camborne)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Granville, E.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gray, Milner
Kelly, W. T.


Brooke, W.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Kennedy, Thomas


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Groves, Thomas E.
Kinley, J.


Burgess, F. G.
Grundy, Thomas W.
Knight, Holford


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)


Cameron. A. G.
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Lathan, G.


Charleton, H. C.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Law, A. (Rosendale)


Lawrence, Susan
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Lawson, John James
Muff, G.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Leach, W.
Murnin, Hugh
Smith, H. B. Lees-(Keighley)


Lee, J[...]e (Lanark, Northern)
Naylor, T. E.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Lees, J.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Snell, Harry


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Oldfield, J. R.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Logan, David Gilbert
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Sorensen, R.


Longbottom, A. W.
Palin, John Henry
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Longden, F.
Paling, Wilfrid
Strauss, G. R.


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Palmer, E. T.
Sullivan, J.


Lowth, Thomas
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lunn, William
Perry, S. F.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham. Plaistow)


MacDonald. Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Thurtle, Ernest


McElwee, A.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Tinker, John Joseph


McEntee, V. L.
Pole, Major D. G.
Townend, A. E.


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Potts, John S.
Trevelyar, Rt. Hon Sir Charles


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Vaughan, D. J.


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Viant, S. P.


McShane, John James
Raynes, W. R.
Walker, J.


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wallace, H. W.


March, S.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Trees)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Markham, S. F.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Watkins, F. C.


Marshall, Fred
Romeril, H. G.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Mathers, George
Rowson, Guy
Wellock, Wilfred


Matters, L. W.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Melville, Sir James
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
West, F. R.


Messer, Fred
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Westwood, Joseph


Middleton, G.
Sanders W. S.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Montague, Frederick
Sawyers, G. F.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Morley, Ralph
Scott, James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (preston)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond



Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N)
Shillaker, J. F.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mort, D. L.
Shinwell, E.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. William Whitely.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte. Lieut.-Colonel
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Balniel, Lord
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Salmon, Major I.


Berry, Sir George
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Bird, Ernest Roy
Hanbury, C.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Savery, S. S.


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Has[...]am, Henry C.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Boyce, H. L.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Bracken, B.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. sir S. J. G.
Smithers, Waldron


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hurd, Percy A.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Butler, R. A.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast South)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth, S.)`
Llewllin, Major J. J.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A.(Birm., W.)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Tinne, J. A.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Lymington, Viscount
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Maltaland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Train, J.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Marjorlbanks, E. C.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Colman, N. C. D.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Colville, Major D. J.
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Cranborne, Viscount
Mond, Hon. Henry
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wells, Sydney R.


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Nicholson, O. (Westminister)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Eden, Captain Anthony
Penny, Sir George
Womersley, W. J.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston[...]M.)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Falie, Sir Bertram G.
Pownail, Sir Assheton



Fielden, E. B.
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ford, Sir P. J.
Reynolds, C[...]l. Sir James
Major Sir George Hennessy and


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Sir Frederick Thomson.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Renneil



Question put, and agreed to.

ESTIMATES.

Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence and an Appendix, brought up, and read;

Report to lie upon the table, and to be printed.

MINISTER'S REMUNERATION.

Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence and Appendices, brought up, and read;

Report to lie upon the table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to—

Sea Fisheries Regulation (Expenses)

Bill, without Amendment.

Housing (No. 2) Bill,

Bournemouth Corporation Bill,

Southend-on-Sea Corporation Bill,

Manchester Corporation (General Powers) (No. 2) Bill,

Cardiff Corporation Bill,

Bristol Cattle Market Bill,

Dartford and Purfleet (Thames) Tunnel Bill (Certified Bill),

Bristol Corporation (No. 2) Bill, with Amendments.

HOUSING (No. 2) BILL.

Lords Amendments to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 252.]

Orders of the Day — LAND DRAINAGE (No. 2) BILL [Lords].

As amended (in the Standing Committee) considered.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Protection for ancient monuments.)

Nothing in this Act shall be taken to authorise any person to execute any works or do anything in contravention of the provisions of the Ancient Monuments (Consolidation and Amendment) Act, 1913.—[Dr. Addison.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Dr. Addison): I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
4.0 p.m.
It is proposed to insert this Clause to bring the law into line as regards Crown and other property, to secure that nothing shall be done under this Bill to affect ancient monuments which are in charge of the First Commissioner of Works without the consent of the First Commissioner. It is purely a formal matter.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: I would like some information about this proposed new Clause, which the right hon. Gentleman said he is moving so as to protect the position of the First Commissioner of Works. It is a little curious that the First Commissioner is not here to protect his own Commissioners. The point, however, that I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer is this: In the event of some ancient monuments being in such a position that land drainage cannot be effected under the Bill, what is the procedure that will then take place? It is quite conceivable that one of these ancient monuments, which all of us wish to preserve, might really be standing in the way of carrying out some of the Clauses of the Bill. I think that the House has every right to some explanation as to what proceedings will take place in such a case. I feel sure that if we could have some clear explanation, it would be possible for the House to pass the Clause as it stands, but unless the Government are prepared to give us some explanation, I do not see why they should have a Clause when,
although the right hon. Gentleman says there is nothing in it, it may be conceivable that there is some necessity for some means of getting round this particular case. I do not think there is any further point I wish to raise on this Clause, but I do press for an answer to the point I have put.

Dr. ADDISON: By the leave of the House, I would say that in Clause 77 of the Bill the same provision is contained with regard to property in possession of the Crown. In this particular case, seeing that the First Commissioner of Works is charged with the custody and maintenance of these monuments, quite clearly a drainage authority should not proceed to endanger such monuments until they have consulted with the First Commissioner of Works. It is only that his consent should be obtained, and, seeing that he is in charge of these monuments, it is only reasonable that he should be made aware of what is proposed to be done.
Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
Clause added to the Bill.

Mr. SPEAKER: The next Amendment I select is that in the name of the Minister, on Clause 2.

Sir JOSEPH LAMB: May I respectfully ask why the new Clause standing in my name and the names of other hon. Members—(Land Drainage Appeal Tribunal)—is not called? If it is not in order, may I have some direction from you as to how I could obtain the discussion of this matter, seeing that it is one of very great importance, and, naturally, one does not wish to attempt in any way to proceed in any but an orthodox manner.

Mr. SPEAKER: It is not usual for the Speaker to give reasons why he does not select any Amendment. In this particular case the Clause is out of order, because it creates a charge, and a charge cannot be created on the Report stage.

Sir J. LAMB: Should I be in order at a later stage in moving the re-committal of the Bill in order to get a discussion, and at what time would you rule that I should make that Motion?

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think that it would be at all suitable procedure.

Sir J. LAMB: My only course then, I take it, would be to speak on the Third Reading against the Bill, and to raise the question of the omission of certain things from the Bill?

Mr. SPEAKER: It is quite an unusual procedure for the Speaker to give advice as to how and when Members should raise various questions. My time would be more than fully occupied if that were the customary procedure.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Would it not be perfectly possible for the hon. Member to put himself in order by throwing the charge for this appeal court on to the ratepayers, as everything else in this Bill is thrown?

Mr. SPEAKER: On the Report stage, we cannot put any charge on the ratepayers which was not there already. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman will find that that will affect very seriously some of the Amendments he has on the Order Paper.

Mr. ANNESLEY SOMERVILLE: This matter was discussed very fully in Committee, and there was no suggestion then that it was out of order. If the Bill be re-committed, would it be in order for us again to deal with it?

Mr. SPEAKER: I think it would be a wrong process to re-commit the Bill. The proposal has been already very fully discussed in Committee, and I should deprecate the procedure of again fully discussing the matter on Report. That would be rather an abuse of the procedure of the Report stage.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I see that there is a notice on the Order Paper in the name of the Minister of Agriculture to re-commit the Bill to a Committee of the Whole House. If that Motion be carried, would it be in order for us to move this Clause when the Bill is re-committed?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member will realise that the notice which the Minister of Agriculture gave was to re-commit the Bill with regard to Clauses that are already in the Bill. In this ease the Clause could not possibly be recommitted without a fresh Money Resolution. This is not a Clause which is now in the Bill, and I do not see how the Bill could be re-committed in respect of it.

Lieut.- Colonel ACLAND - TROYTE: When the Money Resolution was passed, this Clause was in the Bill—Clause 53.

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not make the smallest difference. It is not in the Bill now; that is the point.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: Would it be in order to discuss the principle of this Clause on the Third Reading?

Mr. SPEAKER: It certainly would not be in order to discuss anything that is not in the Bill. I think the proceedings show it to be advisable to follow the usual procedure and for me not to give reasons for the selection or otherwise of new Clauses or Amendments on the Report stage.

CLAUSE 2.—(Catchment areas.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 2, line 33, at the end, to insert the words:
and in particular where the natural direction of the drainage of any land has been artificially altered, an order under this subsection may be made specifying the catchment area, if any, to which the land in question is to belong.
This Amendment is necessary because we find that in two or three cases works have been undertaken artificially to take the water from what would be one watershed into another, and it would be necessary, clearly, that the watershed area should be defined as belonging to a particular area.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: The words proposed to be inserted here deal only with the past. May I ask the Minister how he proposes to deal with the future? If a local authority wishes to bring water from another catchment area, what is going to happen? Secondly, suppose that one catchment area wishes to alter its boundaries. It is often very difficult to lay down where one catchment area begins and another ends. It is sometimes a question of merely a few inches, and it is extremely hard to define the actual level of the ground. The level is constantly sinking, for one thing, and drainage operations are constantly going on. I think that what is needed is some provision to deal with the future, in order that catchment area boards may be able to make arrangements for exchanges, whereby one may agree to take a little of another's land and to give to the other
some of its land in return. My right hon. Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Guinness) and others have an Amendment on the Paper which raises that point, and I very much hope that it will receive attention. Perhaps the Minister will say whether there is anything now in the Bill to allow one catchment board to make arrangements with a neighbouring catchment board, or, in case there is no catchment board, with a drainage board, as to the mutual management of their areas.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. W. R. Smith): I think that the point raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage) will be found to be dealt with later on in the Bill, and possibly it might be considered there. The present Amendment deals with the case where water from one catchment area has been artificially turned into another catchment area, and, under the Amendment, power is taken to determine to which catchment area the land relating to it shall be attached. It does not touch the point raised by the hon. and gallant Member.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: I should like to ask what will happen in the case of large waterworks and reservoirs, where a great deal of water from one catchment area may be directed into another catchment area. I do not see the object of this Amendment. Is the Minister going to interfere with these big reservoirs? This Amendment was not suggested in Committee, and I think it better that the matter should be left as it is.

Dr. ADDISON: The object of this Amendment is only to enable us to say what is the area of the catchment board's operations. It is simply to enable us to define that area.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: This Amendment raises a very important question, and it is amazing that it was not put into the Bill before. I should like to have an assurance from the Minister that, in connection with these catchment areas, there will be no interference with the work of local authorities who may be engaged in the construction of reservoirs and so on, which are needed for the health of the people. If it is not in-
tended needlessly to interfere with such matters, I, personally, should be satisfied to accept the Amendment, but as, apparently, it is a new Amendment which has been brought forward quite suddenly, I think that those of us who are interested in these matters should realise the difficulties with which local authorities have to contend in connection with this question of water supplies for their own localities. As I have said, if I could have an assurance that this proposal will not increase their difficulties, I should be inclined to look upon the Amendment rather more kindly.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 3.—(Constitution of Catchment Boards and appointment of members.)

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 3, line 26, to leave out from the beginning to the word "the" in line 31.
The words which I desire to leave out are words which limit or direct the county councils and county borough councils as to whom they should call on to the catchment board. These catchment boards have large powers of levying money. They can raise money in three ways—either from the national Treasury, or from the internal drainage boards, or by precept from the county councils and from the county boroughs of the counties. They have the spending of the money that they raise, and they decide what money they require. The check upon extravagance on the part of the catchment boards is the indirect representation of the county councils and the county boroughs on the catchment boards. The catchment, board is composed as to two-thirds of representatives of the counties and county boroughs, and so as to one-third of representatives of the internal drainage boards. I would call the attention of the House to the fact that, the more money they raise from the internal drainage boards, the less they will need from the county councils, and, therefore, it is justifiable to retain control over the catchment board by the county councils and the county boroughs, in order to prevent the ratepayers being unduly bled by the catchment board.
Therefore, it is extraordinarily important that we should have on these
catchment boards people who do represent the people who are going to pay the money, that is to say, the ratepayers. Two-thirds of the members are taken from the county councils, leaving out the county boroughs for the moment, as they are the subject of a subsequent Amendment, which proposes that not more than one-half of the members selected by the county councils and county boroughs shall come from the county boroughs—who represent the big ratepayers—and one-half shall come from the county councils. These people are the watchdogs of the ratepayers, and I maintain that it is undesirable to stipulate specially in an Act of Parliament that the county councils and county boroughs, in making their selection, should appoint:
as far as practicable ….persons having a practical knowledge of land drainage.
That does not mean the people who dig the drains. The agricultural labourer has no ghost of a chance of being on these committees—[Interruption]—because he has not what is called practical knowledge, and also because he is not at present on the county council. The people who have practical knowledge are the land agents for the landlords of agricultural land. Why should we direct county councils, which are Conservative enough by nature, and, as it is, are sufficiently filled with the importance of the agricultural interest—why should we direct them more particularly to select that class of people which is almost inevitably selected at the present time by the county councils?
If you were to say to the county councils, "Please elect on these catchment boards just those people who will be most interested in spending money"—because, if they are interested in land drainage, they will naturally want more land drainage—there might be something to be said for it, but there is nothing to be said for saying that to a county borough, which has not on its own body any people who know specially about drainage and are interested in spending money on drainage. I would have these catchment boards, Which are the only safeguard for the ratepayers, as representative of the ratepayers as possible. I object fundamentally to their being indirectly elected; I think they ought to be directly elected by the ratepayers; but, if they are to be indirectly elected,
for goodness sake let there be a chance of their being composed of people who are expert in saving public money, and not of people who are interested in spending money in this way. I do beg my right hon. Friend to consider whether, without spoiling his Bill, he cannot just rectify that little piece of padding in it, which is quite unnecessary and which, as I think, directs the attention of the county councils and the county borough councils away from the principal duty of these catchment boards, which is that of protecting the ratepayers from unnecessary extravagance.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: One can quite appreciate the anxiety and desire of my right hon. and gallant Friend to take steps to prevent the money of the ratepayers being unnecessarily and unwisely spent, but I think I can assure him that by deleting these words he will be running a greater risk in that direction than if they are retained. The House must remember that this Bill provides for the establishment of drainage authorities on a national basis. In some districts they will be new bodies, and it is desirable as far as possible to retain all the accumulated experience that has been gathered in the past by people who have been carrying on this work. That, really, is the purpose of the Bill, and I remember that, when the Royal Commission was discussing this question, the point was emphasised that it would be a mistake and a most undesirable procedure if, in the establishment of the new authorities, due regard and attention were not paid to the fact that in some districts there are men of very great experience in regard to land drainage, and that it would be a mistake if their experience and assistance were not utilised on these new authorities. The very purpose of this Clause as it is drafted is to use experience whereby economies may result. If people have to deal with this question who have no knowledge of it beforehand, they are much more likely to make mistakes than people with accumulated experience. Therefore, I suggest to my right hon. and gallant Friend that the Clause as it stands is more likely to achieve the purpose he has in mind than it would be if these words were deleted.

Mr. WALLHEAD: The speech of the hon. Gentleman is very interesting, but it
does not seem to me to be particularly clear on the point. I should imagine that most of these schemes for land drainage and catchment areas would be the work of civil engineers. They would be the advisers, and not the particular gentlemen who may be selected from any particular owning class. I cannot conceive of any body of persons of a lay character being permitted to undertake any large scheme involving the expenditure of public money without being advised by expert civil engineers—men who have devoted a very large part of their time to such matters, and have become really expert on the technical and engineering side. I should imagine that they would be the persons who would be responsible for the plans, because I assume that plans would have to be drawn up, and that it would be upon those plans and upon the engineering opinion tendered by the experts that the bodies responsible would in the main have to come to decisions. Generally speaking, in British administrative life, such bodies are not overcrowded by experts, but they are at any rate bodies of persons who are responsible for coming to decisions on the advice tendered to them by experts. It seems to me that in the main it is far safer to trust to the actual engineering expert than to the layman who is called an expert, and who may have various interests to serve quite apart from the interest of the ratepayers themselves.

Mr. BLINDELL: I hope that the House will not accept this Amendment. I think that the whole Clause dealing with the constitution of these catchment boards does not admit the importance that ought to be attached to people who have been engaged for the whole of their lives in drainage operations. The whole Clause, in my judgment, and the whole foundation of these boards, is not just to the rural districts. Two-thirds of the members are to be appointed by the county councils and county boroughs, with only one-third from the internal drainage boards, and that upon the advice of the Minister. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman who moved this Amendment seemed to be afraid that the urban districts would be called upon to pay the piper and would not be able to call the tune. If you get a catchment board established almost exclusively
from the urban population, you not only may have men on it who do not really understand the job of draining land, to the exclusion of experts, but you are also giving the urban representatives the power of levying rates upon the rural population to any extent, and you are excluding the rural population from the representation they are entitled to. I think the Clause ought certainly to stand as it is. It ought not to be weakened any further.
I cannot understand why the right hon. Gentleman should object to the words remaining in the Sub-section that there should be due regard given to the desirability of including, as far as practicable, among the members appointed by them persons having a practical knowledge of land drainage. In my district the drainage authorities have done their work exceedingly well, and I am not going to give way to the statement that any urban representatives upon a catchment board would perform their duties better than they have done in Lincolnshire. We have large drainage rates to pay and, when the new catchment boards are constituted, there will still be rates to pay, and rather than weaken the Clause, there should be a larger representation of the rural areas.

Sir ERNEST SHEPPERSON: I oppose the Amendment and support the Minister. I have had a great deal of experience of drainage boards, both small and large, and I know the value to be attached to members who understand drainage. This new catchment board will be given certain powers of control over internal drainage districts. If we are going to be controlled in our internal districts by a supervisory board, we want to understand that the controlling board is composed of men who have a real knowledge of land drainage, and for those reasons I support the Minister in resisting the Amendment.

Sir WILLIAM WAYLAND: I also support the Minister. One of the weaknesses of local bodies having to deal with problems of which they know nothing at all is that they are entirely in the hands of their experts, but that is quite different with internal drainage boards. Every member of the board of my district has a practical knowledge of drainage. I am confident that, if they were
replaced by men from urban districts, not only would the work cost more but a lot more work, perhaps unnecessary work, would be done. This catchment board will be amply representative of the urban districts. The county councils will see to that. Therefore, I do not see that there is the slightest necessity for the Amendment, which would only weaken bodies which to-day are very efficient and which, we hope, will be equally efficient in the future.

Mr. EDE: I hope by this time the right hon. Gentleman is feeling thoroughly uncomfortable. The whole of the support he has received has come from the other side of the House, apart from his hon. colleague by his side. I cannot help feeling that the principle that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (ColonelWedgwood) proposes to remove from the Bill is a thoroughly unsound one. It ought to be removed from all measures relating to local government. The accepted principle to-day is that men of commonsense control the experts, and that people putting up for local governing bodies are selected, not for their expert knowledge, but because of their sound common sense, and because of the belief on the part of their constituents that they can use that to control the tyranny and the enthusiasm of the experts. I regret that my right hon. Friend cannot allow these catchment boards, which are going to deal with big schemes and not little ones, to be constituted by the county councils and the county borough councils by allowing them to send their best business men for local government purposes on to the boards without asking that they shall have had some practical experience in the past of this Particular thing. They will have to employ engineers and experts of the highest possible class, and we should make sure that there will be a sufficient strength on the catchment boards of common sense people to restrain the experts from extravagance.

Mr. ALPASS: I support the Minister, though I am the first to do so from these benches. I do it because of some little experience I have had as a member of a county land drainage committee. I am not suggesting that others have not had that experience, but their points are met by the Clause. It does not suggest that there shall be any compulsion
in appointing these members, and that they shall all be persons who have had practical knowledge. We are appointing catchment boards responsible for the carrying out of very important work. Anyone would imagine that it would be desirable that, amongst the persons to be appointed to do this very important work, regard should be had, as far as practicable, to including some amongst them who have had practical knowledge of the job. The criticism that I have most often to meet against some of the proposals which hon. Members and myself are advocating is that they would rule out men of experience. Now we are endeavouring to make sure that some of them will be included. I hope the House will allow the Clause to stand.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I am not always in a position to support the Minister but in this case I most certainly can. It is obvious that, when you are setting up boards, you must have men of practical experience, though they need not be experts. That is the line that the county councils take as far as they can.

Amendment negatived.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 3, line 33, to leave out from the word "area," to the end of the sub-section.
I think it would be better to leave these words out. If they remained they would lead to complications. You would have bodies squabbling amongst themselves whether they had the proper representation that they ought to have. The county council, in making their ch[...] will give consideration to the point [...] out it being actually laid down in there words.

Brigadier-General BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment and to ask the Minister whether consideration has been given to the point, as was promised in Committee.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg the Minister not to accept this Amendment, because it is in exactly the opposition direction to the one we have already had. The representation on the catchment boards should be strictly according to the amount contributed by the various districts. This would mean that the people
who get the benefit of the expenditure will be represented and those who find the money will not.

Dr. ADDISON: I understand the hon. Members who have moved and seconded the Amendment were both on the Committee, and they have put the Amendment down as a sort of echo of the discussions we had upstairs. On the whole, I think it would be better to leave the words as they are.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I think we ought to have a slightly more detailed explanation. The actual amounts paid by urban and rural districts are not alike. Urban districts are rated at a third in some cases. I understand, however, that in a catchment area that is not so. I have no very great objection to these words remaining in, but I think the Minister wants to watch the working of this, because it may cause a great deal of unfairness in some districts. This is one of the many cases in which an amending Act will be required, and I look forward very shortly to this Government, if it remains in power, bringing in an amending Act to correct a great many of the anomalies that are foreshadowed in these words that the Minister is insisting on putting in.
Amendment negatived.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 4, to leave out lines 1 to 12.
The effect of this proviso is that the number of members of a catchment board appointed by the Councils of County Boroughs shall not exceed one-half of the aggregate number appointed by the Councils of Counties and County Boroughs. If the county boroughs are going to pay far more rates than the county councils, they ought to have a larger share of representation. That is one of the old fundamental principles, that those who find the money should call the tune. This proviso is directed intentionally to put an end to that, and to provide that the county councils shall have more than their fair share of representation. If the urban councils are to pay the money, they ought to have their fair representation on the board. The Association of Municipal Corporations made representations on this point to the Royal Commission, and the Royal Com-
mission, in their report, recommended that representation on the board should be in accordance with the contributions of the locality. The House should remember that we are only talking now of two-thirds of the representation of the catchment board and that one-third is there by reason of the fact that it represents the internal boards, the existing boards engaged in drainage operations. If the boroughs contribute three-quarters of the new rates levied by the catchment boards, I cannot understand why they should not be entitled to have two-thirds of the representation. This Measure as an Act will be weighted in every step in favour of the landlords of this country, and it is unfair upon the county boroughs that they should not have an adequate voice upon the one authority which is left to protect them from extortionate demands upon the ratepayers.
I wish the House to realise that this Bill is going to put at least £250,000 a year upon the ratepayers of this country. All these 50 boards will have a paid chairman, their members will be paid, they will have a staff, and offices will require to be built. When I say £250,000 I am probably under-estimating the annual charge upon the ratepayers of this country. All the work could very well be done, as in the case of electricity and other things, by joint boards from boroughs and county boroughs. We are to have this entirely new and expensive administration superimposed upon the country, and it is, therefore, all the more important that we should see that they have every incentive for saving money instead of having every incentive for spending money. If they represent the purely agricultural districts, the agricultural areas which will benefit by land drainage, and the people who have to pay the money are not represented on the boards, there is going to be extravagance, and there will be complaints from the ratepayers which will come as a shock to any Government which goes to the country on the strength of having introduced these proposals. The matter should be left as provided for at the bottom of page 3, to the effect that
as respects the members of a catchment board to be appointed by councils of counties and of county boroughs, the number to be severally appointed shall be such as the Minister may determine by the esti-
mated amounts of the contributions to be made by those councils respectively towards the expenses of the board.

Dr. ADDISON: I am sorry that I cannot accept the Amendment of my right hon. and gallant Friend. I appreciate his point that the people who find the most money should have the greatest share in calling the tune, but at the same time I think that he overlooked the facts of the case in this particular respect. It may be—I dare say that it will be—that in some cases the county boroughs inside the catchment area will be the most highly rated part of the district. On the other hand, there will be several cases where this will not be so. There are many catchment areas which have not any county borough at all.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: That is provided for already.

Dr. ADDISON: There is a great variety of catchment boards. You have also to remember that you may have an area where there may be one or two wealthy county boroughs but where a vast extent of the low-lying land may be subject to inundation. It is obvious, therefore, that you ought to secure good representation. Not only those who pay, but those who incur the risk should have a voice in the matter as well. In order to keep a fair balance between these conflicting interests, the provisions embodied in the Bill were arrived at. Originally, the figure was greater. The present proposal is a compromise which has been arrived at, and I think that on the whole it is a fair compromise considering the variety of catchment boards and the different interests necessarily involved.

Lieut. - Colonel ACLAND - TROYTE: Once more I come to the support of the Minister, although I would prefer to see "one-third" instead of "one-half." We want to have people on these boards who understand the work which is to be placed upon them. Members of a borough council have nothing like the same interest in this question as members of a county council or a rural district council. Therefore, you want to have as large representation of county council and county districts as you can possibly obtain. It is curious to observe that the right hon. and gallant Member
who moved the Amendment put the objection to the counties exactly the other way round. We as counties are afraid that boroughs will force vast expenditure upon us and will use the Act as a means of relieving unemployment and not so much in the interests of drainage. I can foresee a large amount of expenditure. We think that we have not received sufficient representation of the lowland districts. Another interesting feature which I noticed about the speech of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was that he said that those who found the money should call the tune and that the representation should be in accordance with the amount of contributions to be paid. That is a most peculiar doctrine to come from the Socialist benches. I wonder he did not bring that argument forward on the Finance Bill regarding Super-tax. If that argument applies in this case, surely it ought to have applied in the other case. I hope that the Minister will stick to this Sub-section, that I shall be allowed to move my Amendment later on, and that he will accept my proposal that the representation of the county boroughs shall not in any case exceed one-third instead of one half.

Mr. McSHANE: I desire to support the Amendment of my right hon. and gallant Friend. I should like to point out that, as the Bill stands at the moment and assuming an arbitrary number of 36 members on the board, the county boroughs will only be entitled to representation at the maximum of something like 12. It will be noted that the Clause does not say that they shall have 50 per cent. of the representation, but that it shall not exceed one-half. The Minister spoke of those who pay and those who incur risks. Up to this moment, I have always thought that the person who had to pay was the one who would settle the amount of the risk. In this extraordinary case we are getting people to incur risk at the expense of those who will have to pay. I do not want the Minister of Agriculture to bring in a new form of extremism with regard to expenditure of money in rural areas. If one section of the community is to be allowed all the risk of spending all the money they wish and another section is to be allowed the privilege of providing the money, there will not be harmony in the operation of these boards.

Mr. BLINDELL: I wish to emphasise the point which I put previously. I do not agree at all that in many parts of England the county boroughs will be called upon to pay the larger sums of money required. In many parts of the country it will be the rural population who will have to pay drainage rates. The catchment boards will have the power of precept upon the internal drainage boards and to say that the county boroughs should have more than half of the aggregate number of members to be appointed by the county council and the county boroughs is to ask for the county boroughs a larger representation than they really deserve, or, in some cases, desire. After all, as well as having to pay for drainage, we have to have men who understand the job in order to see that we get decent schemes. In my judgment, you get more expert men in land drainage from the rural districts than you do from the county boroughs, and whether the representation is one-half or one-third it will in many parts of the country, be distinctly unjust to rural districts. I hope that the Amendment will not be pressed so that it will be possible for them to have more adequate representation.

Mr. MacLAREN: I am afraid the hon. Member for Holland-with-Boston (Mr. Blindell) does not appreciate the Amendment. It is to delete the two provisos which lay down a definite number so that the Minister should be guided by subsection (3) and that the members of a catchment board to be appointed by councils of counties and of county boroughs should be such as the Minister might determine having regard to the contributions to be made. It might be 50 per cent. or it might be more.

Mr. BLINDELL: As I understand Clause 3, the proportion of members to be elected by the county councils and the borough councils is two-thirds, and the Bill, as it stands, says that of that two-thirds not more than half shall be appointed by the borough councils. I understand that the Mover of the Amendment wants to make it possible for the county boroughs to have the power of holding more than half of that two-thirds and this would be an unjust representation of the county boroughs.

Mr. MacLAREN: I would agree to the Amendment of my right hon. and gallant
Friend on the principle that those who find the money should call the tune. I want to congratulate him on moving this Amendment. It is only a few days ago that he and another hon. Gentleman opposite were doing their very best to support the power of the county council against the boroughs and borough councils in my Division. Now that they are coming round to see the viciousness of their own doctrine, I am prepared to support my right hon. and gallant Friend in this Amendment. I think there is no gainsaying the fact that in Staffordshire, where there is a great submerged area, most of the rates will be placed upon the county boroughs. They will certainly have to pay most of the money, for the area concerned has been an eyesore for years. In any case, whether they have to do so or not, I think that the matter should be left, as stated in Sub-section (3), to the discretion of the Minister, having regard to the amount paid by the councils respectively.
Amendment negatived.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 4, line 5, to leave out the word "one-half," and to insert instead thereof the word "one-third.'
I have said all that I need say about this Amendment. I consider that the proportion of the representation should be one-third and not one-half.

Brigadier-General BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I am afraid that for the reasons which I indicated previously I cannot accept the Amendment. This matter was discussed for a good many hours and the provision in the Bill is a compromise. I must point out that my hon. Friend overlooks the question of risk. It is not the man who pays for the Old Age Pension who always enjoys the benefit of it. You must have regard to the risk of those living in widely scattered county areas.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I would like to scotch the argument about risk. It is not a question of the risk which is being entered into by the drainage of these areas. If those areas are not drained, the land owned by the landlords alongside the river is of low value. Directly the money of Stoke-on-Trent and the other boroughs is spent upon draining the land,
it is not a question of risk for the landlord but a question of how much he is going to benefit.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I desire to take up this question of risk in the case of this particular Amendment. We have had it laid down most clearly and definitely from the other side that in this matter the only way in which to have fairness is that those who actually pay the money shall call the tune. That is a doctrine which is absolutely sound. In common fairness, no one can contravert it in any way whatever. If this Amendment were accepted, it would assist matters enormously. I con- gratulate most humbly and respectfully the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) on having made a contribution to this debate which, although unique from him, at any rate is valuable. He said that in this particular respect those who actually find the money should have the entire manipulation of it. I think that those who support this Amendment have a very good case, and I hope that the Minister will give further consideration to it. If my hon. Friends desire to go to a Division on it, I shall most certainly support them, because I think the substance of this Amendment will enable a curiously unstable sort of Bill to be made more stable, and I think any Amendment which makes the Bill even slightly better is one which the House itself should be willing to accept.
Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 4.—(Schemes for reorganisation of internal drainage authorities in catchment areas.)

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 5, line 17, at the end, to insert the words:
or in the case of Commissoners of Sewers who exercise jurisdiction partly within and partly without the catchment area, the abrogation of the powers of those commissioners within the catchment area.
This Amendment is to meet the point, which was raised in Committee, where an existing drainage authority may be dealing with land which is partly within and partly without a catchment area. The question arose as to how such a situation could be dealt with. This makes due provision to meet the case, whereby the land outside the catchment area will
be dealt with either by an internal board, or as the circumstances of the case warrant. At any rate, this Amendment meets the point which was raised in Committee.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I presume that this is suggested in order to meet the case of Lincolnshire. Is the Minister satisfied that the truncated line of sewers on the north-east coast of Lincolnshire which are not in the catchment area will be able to function? I doubt it very much. There is still time for the Minister to look into the matter before the Bill goes to the House of Lords.
Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendment made: In page 5, line 36, leave out the words "for altering or supplementing in any respect," and insert instead thereof the words:
"the making of alterations in and the addition of supplemental provisions to."—[Dr. Addison.]

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: I beg to move, in page 6, line 12, to leave out the word "and."
The object of this Amendment is to make it an obligation on the catchment board to send copies of any schemes which they may make to all the authorities concerned. In Sub-section (2) it provides that copies of the scheme shall be sent to the council of every county and county borough, etc., but there are other authorities to be considered. There are the urban districts, the non-county boroughs, and the rural districts. It is curious that when the Minister wishes these smaller bodies to do something for him, he provides that they shall be considered, as in Clause 6 (4), where the urban districts are taken notice of. I submit that the sending of copies of schemes to these additional bodies would involve very little additional expense or trouble.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I beg to second the Amendment.
It does seem that once again the Ministry have gone out of their way to leave out the urban and rural districts. They mention here every kind of authority—drainage boards, navigation authorities, highway authorities and conservancy authorities. They take in the whole of these authorities—all very important authorities in connection with drainage matters, as, indeed, are the
county councils and county boroughs; but you are dependent, on these occasions, in the matter of these consultations, on the good will of the whole of the local authorities. For that reason, I do think that, in common fairness, on occasions such as these the Ministry might consult these bodies, who are comparatively small bodies compared with the county authorities, but who are very often the key authorities in many of these cases. For that reason, unless the Ministry has some overwhelming reason for not taking in these authorities, it is only just to take them in. I think that the Ministry will have to have a very strong case before it can justify their exclusion.
May I be allowed to say one more word about this particular point? There have been several instances when these two particular authorities—the urban district council and the rural district council—have been omitted on various occasions. It seems to be part of the policy of certain Departments. I would ask the various Departments concerned whether they cannot now dispense with the system of squeezing out these very valuable local authorities, which do very good work. If they reversed their present procedure, and took in these bodies, it would add enormously to the value of the work which might be undertaken.

Dr. ADDISON: If we were to impose upon the catchment board the duty of sending particulars of every scheme to every authority in the whole of their area, it would be imposing upon them an unnecessary and a wasteful obligation. For example, take the catchment area of the River Trent which includes vast numbers of authorities, urban and rural, as well as a number of county boroughs. Under this Amendment the Board would have to send to all those bodies particulars of all schemes, although it might be that a particular scheme did not concern more than one of them. It is laid down that particulars of all schemes are to be published in various newspapers, and in many other ways, in order to ensure a very wide publicity, and that those who are concerned are made fully acquainted with the whole matter. I think therefore it would be an entire waste of effort on the part of the catchment board to have to
send these elaborate details to every authority in the area, many of whom may not be concerned at all.

Mr. BLINDELL: I hope that the Minister has not said his last word on this particular Amendment. Although it is true that the non-county boroughs and the urban district councils will he represented through the county councils, surely when a large scheme is prepared, it would not be a wasteful extravagance to have one or two extra copies made and sent to the authorities within the catchment area. I represent a district in which there is a non-county borough and several very large urban district councils. They will be called upon to find a fair sum of money in order to meet, the payment for these schemes. It would be an act of courtesy if the Minister were to accept this Amendment, so that all those authorities might receive copies of the scheme. It might prove an easier way to get them to agree to schemes if they were consulted; they would feel that they had a stake in the scheme and a word to say upon it. After all, the scheme is only sent to them for their consideration; there is no power given them to alter the scheme or even to make recommendations for the altering of the
Scheme. It would be a mere act of courtesy to send to them copies of any schemes which were being prepared, so that they might have first-hand information as to what was being propounded. I do ask the Minister to reconsider his decision and accept this Amendment, unless he can give some real, definite example of where it would work to the disadvantage of the whole scheme of the Bill. Personally, I feel he would be well advised to accept this Amendment, because it would be an act of courtesy to these local authorities, which they would highly appreciate.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: The Minister said it would involve great trouble and expense to send notices to all the authorities in a catchment area. Surely that is very much restricted by the words "affected thereby"? I would also ask him whether it is not the case that, in very many instances, the smaller authority may be more greatly affected than the county borough. I would appeal to him to reconsider his decision, and accept the Amendment.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: The Minister of Agriculture, I think, rather exaggerates the difficulty of providing these smaller drainage boards with this information. It is quite easy, and without very much additional expense, for them to be notified of any change which it is proposed to make in the drainage of their areas, and a concession of this nature would make a great deal of difference to the smooth working of the Measure. If these local authorities oppose instead of help any proposal, it will increase the difficulties. The great thing is to keep them in a good mood, and if they are not notified of any change it is quite probable that they may oppose the scheme. The Amendment may make a great deal of difference to the smooth working of the Bill, and in that case it is well worth the small extra amount of money which is entailed.

Sir DOUGLAS NEWTON: May I make a further appeal to the Minister of Agriculture to reconsider this proposal? It is not only the smaller authorities which may be affected, but in some cases authorities of considerable standing. In the case of the borough I have the honour to represent, they will be called upon to pay no less than three-quarters of any rate levied upon the county as a whole, and, therefore, I think they are properly entitled, as a very responsible body, to receive this notice.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: The Minister of Agriculture sems to be making a mountain out of a molehill. The number of these extra notices would not be very large, and a halfpenny stamp does not cost very much. It is a matter of courtesy that smaller authorities should receive this notice.

Dr. ADDISON: I have no desire to be discourteous to any authority; at the same time, hon. Members seem to be under a misapprehension as to the nature of the scheme. It is not a scheme for works upon which a large sum of money is to be spent, but a scheme for the reorganisation of internal drainage authorities in catchment areas, and the Clause provides that all the drainage authorities which are affected shall have notice of the scheme. They are already provided for. It seems to me that by the Amendment we are asking these bodies to incur a gross waste of expen-
diture if we put upon them the obligation to send the full details of these complicated schemes, affecting only one or two drainage authorities in the area, to every rural district wherever it may be situated. I am prepared to accept an alteration in the Amendment to this effect—to insert the words "which are affected," thus making it an obligation for the catchment board to send copies to the authorities which are affected.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Surely the words "affected thereby," which already appear in this Sub-section, carry out the same thing as is now suggested by the Minister of Agriculture? The Amendment does not mean that an area in Devon shall be consulted about an area in the Wash.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will kindly repeat the words he proposes to insert in my Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I suggest that the words "which are affected" should be added.

Mr. BLINDELL rose—

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Robert Young): The hon. Member has already spoken on this Amendment.

Mr. BLINDELL: Do I understand that having spoken once I cannot speak again on this proposal?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: This is the Report stage.

Mr. BLINDELL: I want to ask a question. The Amendment only refers to authorities which are affected.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: If the Minister of Agriculture is going to accept the Amendment with an alteration perhaps he will let me have it so that I can put it from the Chair.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: We do not want the Amendment negatived if we are going to get a concession from the Minister of Agriculture, and I hope, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, that you will exercise [...] little patience and give the Minister a little time in order to write out the Amendment, as this is a rather unusual proceeding. The affected local authorities would be within the catchment area,
and that is the intention of the Amendment. It may be necessary to insert the words "authorities which are affected," in order to make the position clear.

Mr. DENMAN: It seems to me that the words of the Amendment carry out the intention of the Minister of Agriculture, and, if that be so, the simplest procedure would be to accept the Amendment and then have the matter put right in another place, if it is found that the words do not carry out the intention of the House.

Dr. ADDISON: I am willing to accept the Amendment on that understanding.
Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendment made: In page 6, line 12, after the word "borough," insert the words "and district."—[Mr. A. Somerville.]

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to move, in page 6, line 33, at the end, to insert the words:
(5) Catchment Boards may, with the assent of the Minister and local authorities and for purposes of simplification of administration, or where the geographical boundaries are difficult to define, make an agreement with the neighbouring Catchment Boards or, where there is no Catchment Board, with a drainage board for mutual adjustment of boundaries notwithstanding the exact geographical catchment area as defined by survey.
It is rather remarkable that while drainage boards within a catchment area can make mutual arrangements it is not possible for a catchment board to make mutual arrangements with an adjoining catchment board. The Amendment makes it possible for such an arrangement to be made with an adjoining area which is not a catchment area but which may have a drainage board. Let me give the Minister of Agriculture an example of the difficulties we find in Lincolnshire. In the Fen country the levels are particularly small, a difference of a few inches will spread over hundreds of yards, and it is hard to say where the catchment area goes. The levels are so curious that in one place where the drainage ran north and south and there was an objection, it was made to run south and north over a distance of four miles by a slight alteration in the levels. There is no power in this Bill to allow a catchment board to do that kind of thing; and it would be a great conve-
nience to some authorities. The Minister will have a great deal of trouble in the case of a large catchment area like that of the Trent. It may be possible to divide it in half and make two authorities. This Amendment will give the necessary authority.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to second the Amendment.
This is not compulsory, it is simply voluntary, and will make the Bill much easier to work.

Mr. HASLAM: I should like to support the Amendment. The Minister of Agriculture in Committee indicated that the definition of these areas was mainly a matter for engineers; that it was chiefly a geographical question. That is not the case, especially in some of the very flat areas, because it is impossible to say that at any particular point the water on one side will go one way and the water on the other side will go the other way. Consequently, there may be quite a large area which may be the subject of dispute, and it is only reasonable that in cases like that other considerations should be taken into account besides the opinion of an engineer. There is the question of the existing practice and also that of administrative convenience. I have an Amendment later on the Paper dealing with this point, but I think this is the best place to raise the matter, and I hope that the Minister will accept the Amendment and leave it open to the various authorities to come to an agreement among themselves where it is not possible to draw a definite line.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I am sorry that the Government are unable to accept this Amendment. Its effect is much more far-reaching than is supposed by the hon. and gallant Member for Lindsey (Lieut.- Colonel Heneage). In my judgment to accept this Amendment would lead to a very difficult position, and to very far-reaching consequences if we began to interfere with the coundaries of the catchment areas. It would have very serious effects upon questions of rating and voting. I do not think there is any great difficulty in determining, from an engineering point of view, where these boundaries are. There are, of course, cases where the natural flow of water has been disturbed by the construction of artificial works. Provision has already been made to meet
that point by the Amendment which was moved earlier on. I think that is as far as it is desirable to go in varying the boundaries of the catchment areas.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 111; Noes, 227.

Division No. 463.]
AYES.
[5.34 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l.,W.)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Ashley, Lt-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gower, Sir Robert
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Aske, Sir Robert
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Atholl, Duchess of
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Salmon, Major I.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Berry, Sir George
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Hanbury, C.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Savery, S. S.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Haslam, Henry C.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Buckingham, Sir H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Butler, R. A.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Naire)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Thomson, Sir F.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Tinne. J. A.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Colfox, Major William Philip
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Colville, Major D. J.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Cranborne, Viscount
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. sir A. Lambert


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Wells, Sydney R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Muirhead, A. J.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Withers, Sir John James


Eden, Captain Anthony
Peake, Captain Osbert
Womersley, W. J.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Ramsbotham, H.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Reld, David D. (County Down)



Fermoy, Lord
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Ford, Sir P. J.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch't'sy)
Captain Sir George Bowyer and




Sir George Penny.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Grenfell, D. R(Glamorgan)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Charleton, H. C.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middesbro' W.)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Chater, Daniel
Groves, Thomas E.


Altchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Church, Major A. G.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Cluse, W. S.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Alpass, J. H.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Ammon, Charles George
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Arnott, John
Compton, Joseph
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cove, William G.
Hardle, George D.


Ayles, Walter
Cowan, D. M.
Harris, Percy A.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Daggar, George
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Dalton, Hugh
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Barnes, Alfred John
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Haycock, A. W.


Barr, James
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hayday, Arthur


Batey, Joseph
Day, Harry
Hayes, John Henry


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Bellamy, Albert
Ede, James Chuter
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Edmunds, J. E.
Herriotts, J.


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Hirst, G. H. (York W.R. Wentworth)


Benson, G.
Eimley, Viscount
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Foot, Isaac
Hoffman, P. C.


Blindell, James
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, upton)
Hopkin, Daniel


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Horrabin, J. F.


Bowen, J. W.
Gibbins, Joseph
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gill, T. H.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.


Brooke, W.
Gillett, George M.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Brothers, M.
Glassey, A. E.
Johnston, Thomas


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Gossling, A. G.
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Gould, F.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Burgess, F. G.
Granville, E.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Gray, Milner
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Cameron, A. G.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey. Rotherhithe)


Kelly, W. T. Morrison, Herbert
(Hackney, South)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Kennedy, Thomas
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Kinley, J.
Mort, D. L.
Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molten)
Muff, G.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Muggeridge, H. T.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lathan, G.
Murnin, Hugh
Snell, Harry


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Naylor, T. E.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Lawrence, Susan
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Sorensen, R.


Lawson, John James
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lawther, W.(Barnard Castle)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Strauss, G. R


Leach, W.
Palin, John Henry
Sullivan, J


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Palmer, E. T.
Sutton, J. E.


Lees, J.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Perry, S. F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thurtle, Ernest


Logan, David Gilbert
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Tinker, John Joseph


Longbottom, A. W.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Townend, A. E.


Longden, F.
Pole, Major D. G.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Potts, John S.
Vaughan, D. J.


Lowth, Thomas
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Viant, S. P.


Lunn, William
Raynes, W. R.
Walkden, A. G.


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Richards, R.
Walker, J.


McElwee, A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wallace, H. W.


McEntee, V. L.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Wallhead, Richard C.


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Ritson, J.
Watkins, F. C.


MacLaren, Andrew
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Romeril, H. G.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Rowson, Guy
Wellock, Wilfred


McShane, John James
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
West, F. R.


March, S.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Westwood, Joseph


Markham, S. F.
Sanders, W. S.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Marshall, Fred
Sawyer, G. F.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Mathers, George
Scott, James
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Matters, L. W.
Sexton, James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Messer, Fred Shaw
Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Middleton, G.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Mills, J. E.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wise, E. F.


Milner, Major J.
Shillaker, J. F.



Montague, Frederick
Shinwell, E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Morley, Ralph
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)

CLAUSE 5.—(Maps of catchment areas.)

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to move, in page 7, line 35, at the end, to insert the words:
(7) Where, in determining the extent of a catchment area, any difficulty shall arise in delimiting any part of the boundary line owing to the level nature of the ground it shall be permissible to take into consideration the existing boundary line of any area liable to rating for defence against sea water or the boundary line of any county, borough, county district or urban district, or the convenience of members of the drainage authority of that locality as regards venue of meetings or any other sufficient local matter.
The Minister was unable to accept the Amendment which was moved on the last Clause. Here is an Amendment on very similar lines, but very much more circumscribed in its language. Very definite and clear limits are put in this Amendment to what is permissible in determining a catchment area. I think the wording of the Amendment speaks for itself. It will not affect any areas except very flat lands. I think the considerations here set forth are thoroughly reasonable and might very well be accepted by the Minister.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I am afraid that the acceptance of this Amendment would only introduce unnecessary complications. The catchment area is defused geographically. Whether water is going down hill or not is a matter which can be determined by the ordinary methods with complete ease. The Amendment which I have made to Clause 2 covers the exceptional case where there are special works drawing water from one area into another. In the case now under discussion no difficulty could arise. It is purely a question of fact as to whether the water runs down hill in that area. I can assure hon. Members that the ambiguity that they fear is amply covered by the existing provisions.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 6.—(Powers in relation to main river.)

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 7, line 36, to leave out from the beginning to the first "the," in line 38, and to insert instead thereof the words:
The powers conferred by this Act on drainage boards shall, so far as concerns.
This Amendment and those which follow it on the Paper in relation to this Clause, are very largely drafting Amendments and are intended to make it clear that the catchment board alone shall have power to do works in connection with the main channel of the river. This point arose in Committee, and some hon. Members felt that the position was not made quite clear. These Amendments are moved in consequence of an undertaking which was given by the Minister to look into the words, and to define more clearly the duties and obligations of the Catchment Board.
Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendments made: In page 7, line 39, leave out the words "with respect to."
In page 7 line 40, leave out the word "said."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 7, line 40, at the end, to insert the words "be exerciseable solely by the catchment board."

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: In connection with this Amendment there is one point on which I should like a statement from the Minister. The property in the banks of the main channel of the river in certain cases has belonged to the internal district drainage boards. Those river banks will now be taken over by the catchment boards. When they were owned by the internal district boards, the internal districts were liable for any breakages which occurred and for any damage sustained by third parties as a result of breakages. Will the catchment boards now take over that liability, including the liability to recompense any third party who suffers damage by a breakage.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: There are one or two matters in connection with this Clause which ought to be made clear. I think that certain alterations have been made in the definitions of "watercourse" and "main river," and later on we shall come to a number of Amendments proposing to leave out the words "main river." Perhaps the Minister will tell us exactly what will be the result of the Amendments now before us in relation to
that point, and how far the powers to be exercised by the catchment boards over the main river have been altered.

Dr. ADDISON: These Amendments were put down in order to carry out various undertakings which I gave in Committee. I explained then that the Bill proposed that the catchment board should only have authority over the main river. In regard to the point mentioned by the hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson), the duties of the catchment boards apply to the main river and the main river only, and they will take over such obligations as properly attach to those duties in connection with maintenance and repair. These words specifically show that the limit of the catchment board's authority is the main river. They will not trench beyond that and go into the preserves of the authorities in which the hon. Member for Leominster is interested. Those authorities will be fully safeguarded if these words are inserted.

Mr. WELLS: Supposing the main river bank breaks in the middle level where the land is under the level of the sea, causing damage to the extent of hundreds of thousands of pounds by flooding, will that damage have to be met by the catchment board?

Sir WILLIAM WAYLAND: Is there any special definition of "main river" as distinct from "main arterial drain"? The words "main arterial drain" occur in the Bill several times, but there does not seem to be any definition of them, and a main arterial drain may be a river.

Dr. ADDISON: I think these terms are sufficiently defined by the Amendments to the Clause. An arterial drain is dearly something other than a main river. The terms "catchment area" and. "main river" are also defined. As regards the question put by the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Wells) as to the obligations of the catchment board, I could not of course say what those obligations would be held to cover by the law courts in a particular case which has not arisen, but the board will be responsible for keeping the banks in repair, and for maintenance. If anything occurs as a result of their negligence they will be liable to be dealt with accordingly, but as to what may happen in a particular case, I do not prophesy. They would
have the liability attaching to a public authority responsible for the maintenance of the banks.
Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 8, line 7, to leave out from the word "Board" to the end of the Sub-section, and to insert instead thereof the words:
may enter into an agreement with the council of any borough or urban district or with any navigation authority for the carrying out by the council or authority, on such terms as to payment and otherwise as may be specified in the agreement, of any work in connection with the main river which the Catchment Board are authorised to carry out.
It is proposed to insert these words in pursuance of an undertaking which I gave in Committee to clarify the meaning of Sub-section (4). This provision will make it possible for the catchment board in a case where the main river runs through a town to make an arrangement with the local authority—the borough council or the urban district council—to look after a particular piece of work on that part of the river on their behalf. It was felt that the wording originally was not quite clear and I promised to revise it.
Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill," put, and negatived.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the proposed words be there inserted in the Bill."

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 1, after the word "any," to insert the words "county or."
The effect of this alteration in the Amendment would be to give county councils the same right in this matter as borough councils or urban district councils or any of the other bodies mentioned. There is no reason apparent to me why county councils should not be included. It is purely voluntary on the part of the catchment board to make these arrangements with these authorities, and the provision should be made to apply to county councils as well as to other bodies.

Sir J. LAMB: I beg to second the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I do not think it is possible to accept the Amendment to the proposed Amendment, because it would have the effect of extending the operations of this Clause far too widely. Hon. Members opposite must realise that our Amendment is simply intended to make it more clear that it is possible for the catchment board to enter into an arrangement with a borough or urban district council in regard to some specific piece of work, because where the main channel runs through a borough or an urban district the local authorities there, having special obligations and liabilities, have the machinery and so forth for dealing with these matters. But where it is a case of a river running through a county area that is an entirely different thing, and if the proposal of the hon. and gallant. Member were accepted it would mean, in effect, transferring the whole of the powers in this connection to the county councils, which of course is not intended by the Bill. This proposal of ours is merely for the purpose of facilitating particular works, which can be more effectively done by the borough and urban district authorities where they have special obligations and possibly machinery and equipment already in hand for carrying out the work.

Sir J. LAMB: If I may speak again, by leave of the House, I wish to say that it is our object to transfer these powers to the county councils and I am glad that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade appreciates our object. I would call special attention to the case of the Trent area. Here we have one area which affects, I believe, seven or eight counties. In Staffordshire we have the source of the Trent, and we should probably find that if the county could be formed into one area to deal with the River Trent as it passes through the county that would be better than to be associated with seven or eight different authorities who may, on the lower reaches of the river, incur very large expenditure. That expenditure will have no effect whatever on Staffordshire, but Staffordshire will be expected to pay. I think it would be a great advantage to have one authority which could deal with the river within the county.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: I understood the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade to object to the Amendment to the Amendment because it would make this scheme too wide, but I thought the object of the Bill was to have a national scheme and to make it as wide as possible. If the question is to be regarded from a national point of view surely the wider area ought to be accepted. This drainage might materially affect many more bodies than those included in the Government's Amendment. Many people will lose a great deal of money, for example, by floods being taken away from land, causing deterioration of the land, and they ought to have a word to say in this matter in the same way as the borough or urban district councils.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: It is difficult to understand why the Minister will not accept the Amendment to the Amendment. It may be advisable to enter into agreements of this kind with a borough council or an urban district council, but why county councils should not be included also one fails to see.

6.0 p.m.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I think that the Government might accept this Amendment to the proposed Amendment. It Would give a way out from some of the most expensive provisions of the Bill. We are setting up under the Bill what are, in effect, 50 new county councils, possessing over-riding powers running into various counties. If it were possible for counties like Staffordshire, which have the head waters of a river within their area, to contract 6.0 p.m. out of the catchment board and to carry on with their existing machinery, it would be much cheaper than the proposed new system. The new catchment boards are to have paid members and a paid chairman and staff. If we could leave counties such as Staffordshire to contract out of the catchment boards and carry on the works that the catchment board are supposed to carry on under this Bill, with their existing machinery, we should have a far more efficient authority, because it would know its own district. In the case of the Trent Catchment Board, extending from Staffordshire down the country, most of the great works will be in connection with the Lower Trent, at any rate in the first instance.
That is what the people in Staffordshire will object to, because they will have to pay, without any works of importance being carried out in the Upper Trent area. The ratepayers in the upper area will be called upon to find money for the lower reaches. If Staffordshire could be allowed to contract out, they would be enabled to spend the money on improving the river in their own county, instead of the money being spent, as undoubtedly it will be spent, on the lower river. Staffordshire is only one case of the upper water counties which will be affected in this way. Warwickshire is in a somewhat similar position. It will come under the Severn Catchment Board, whereas it would operate much better if it was under the Avon Catchment Board. There must be a number of other cases in point. The only result of accepting this Amendment would be that the same work would be done but done more cheaply by the existing institution, the county council, instead of their being a new catchment board, a more expensive institution, carrying out the work.

Mr. GUINNESS: I think that the Minister is raising unnecessary difficulty in regard to this matter. There would be no compulsion on any catchment board to delegate any work. They would only do it where efficiency would be most likely to be achieved by delegation, and where economy would take place. We are all most anxious that this Bill shall not lead to any unnecessary network of officialdom. Where we can carry on efficiently with the existing agencies it is much better that full use should be made of them. There are precedents for delegating the work from one authority to another, notably in regard to road powers, which may be delegated by a county authority to a rural district. If there was any compulsion on the catchment boards in this proposal which would really deprive them of their powers, I should agree with the Minister, but as the proposal is so elastic and can only be carried out with the consent of the catchment board, I should think that this additional opportunity for adjustment, on the grounds of efficiency, might well be accepted.

Dr. ADDISON: I am afraid that I cannot agree with my right hon. Friend
opposite or with the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood). If this Amendment were accepted, it would mean that there would be pressure from one county and then another to contract out. Staffordshire and Warwickshire have been mentioned, and it would probably mean that 20 more would come along and ask to contract out, and the result would be that by the time the catchment boards were set up, or are likely to be set up, there would no longer be any work for them to do. As we have accepted the principle of the Bill, we had better stick to it. The provision was put down to meet the very proper case of a town through which a river passes and where certain work requires to be done in connection with the scheme. It is considered that to make an arrangement with the municipality is the sensible course to take. That is a different thing from taking in a whole county, where a river stretches perhaps for one hundred miles or 50 miles through its area. If we accepted the conclusion of the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme, we should knock the bottom out of the Bill.

Sir J. LAMB: Is it not possible that the head waters in a county might be no bigger than a tributary, which will be treated as a drainage board?

Dr. ADDISON: It is because the possibilities are so various and so uncertain that I resist the Amendment.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I cannot agree with the argument used by the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood). He argues that we should allow the areas in the upper reaches of the river to form their own catchment area and to leave the authorities in the lower reaches of the river to form their own catchment area. He must know that the bulk of the expense in connection with any main channel occurs at the mouth of the river. If we were to take away the upland areas we should take away the receipts, and we should leave a burden on the counties dealing with the lower reaches of the river which they would be absolutely unable to bear. If that took place, it would
remove any possibility of an efficient management of the main channel of the river.

Mr. WELLS: I am an uplander. The uplanders and the lowlanders can never agree. We in the uplands are asked to pay for the drainage of the lowlands. Of course, the more money the lowlands can get from the uplands the more they will support this Bill. I support the Amendment because I think that the very best way of dealing with drainage is to allow each county, as far as possible, to run its own drainage scheme and pay for it, and in time to amalgamate with other counties as may become necessary, with the catchment board as a sort of council overruling the whole. In the Ouse area we have 11 counties which are all roped together for catchment board purposes. They will not each have direct representatives on the board. In Bedfordshire we have 240,000 acres in the catchment area, and we shall have perhaps one or possibly two representatives. Although Bedford, with 2,000 acres, will be called upon to pay one-half the amount for drainage in the area, we shall be lucky if we have one representative on the catchment board. It would be far better to divide the areas up into counties and, if necessary, make them into internal drainage areas. That would be better than having an unwieldy body which will run the counties into heavy cost.

Sir PATRICK FORD: The main reason advanced by the Minister for not accepting the Amendment is that no work would be left for the board which he favours. I think the hon. Member who has just spoken must have relieved his mind of that anxiety, because if powers are delegated to the local boards there would still be plenty for the superior board to do in connection with matters referred to them in any dispute that might arise. Therefore, if the Minister's principal objection is that he is afraid that the catchment boards would not have enough work to do if he accepted the Amendment, he might relieve his mind and we could get on without wasting more time. We should have done something towards the practical administration of these important matters of water supply and drainage by the acceptance of the Amendment.

Mr. OLIVER STANLEY: The Minister of Agriculture says that if he accepted the Amendment power might be taken piecemeal from the catchment board and given to the various county councils. If he studies the wording of the Clause he will see that the Amendment could only come into operation as the result of an agreement to which the catchment board would be a party, and, secondly, the agreement is limited to the execution and maintenance of works which are authorised. Sub-section (1) says that the catchment board shall
have exclusive powers and jurisdiction with respect to the main river, including the banks thereof, and with respect to drainage works.
In other words, the only thing that is permitted under Sub-section (4) is the delegation of the execution of a particular piece of work or its maintenance when it has been done. There is no question under the Amendment of the giving of any part of a catchment board's powers to a county council. The idea that under the Amendment the whole work of the catchment board will

be gradually swept away is not justified, but the catchment board might quite easily find a situation where one particular work might be executed or maintained more efficiently and more cheaply by the county council, and in those circumstances it might very well wish to enter into an agreement:
for the execution or maintenance of the works.… subject to such terms and conditions as may be agreed.…
I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman has given any conclusive answer to the plea that has been put forward from this side. I do not see that any impairment of the powers of the catchment board would follow the acceptance of the Amendment, but I do say that eases might arise where without the Amendment certain work will have to be less efficiently done and at greater expense than would otherwise be the case.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."

The House divided: Ayes, 124; Noes, 236.

Division No. 464.]
AYES.
[6.14 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l.,W.)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gower, Sir Robert
Ross. Major Ronald D


Atholl, Duchess of
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Berry, Sir George
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Salmon, Major I.


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Savery, S. S.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Hanbury, C.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Haslam, Henry C.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Butler, R. A.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Hills. Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Hurd, Percy A
Thomson, Sir F.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Iveagh, Countess of
Tinne, J. A.


Christle, J. A.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir
George Knox, Sir Alfred
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Train, J.


Colville, Major D. J
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Wallace, Capt. D. E.(Hornsey)


Cranborne, Viscount
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Meller, R. J.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Wells, Sydney R.


Duckworth, G. A. V.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Eden, Captain Anthony
Mulrhead, A. J.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Withers, Sir John James


Erskine. Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Everard, W. Lindsay
Penny, Sir George
Womersley, W. J.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon Sir L.


Fermoy, Lord
Ramsbotham, H.



Flelden, E. B.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Ford, Sir P. J.
Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.
Captain Margesson and Captain




Sir George Bowyer.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hardie, George D.
Palin, John Henry


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Harris, Percy A.
Paling, Wilfrid


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Palmer, E. T.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Perry, S. F.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Haycock, A. W.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Alpass, J. H.
Hayday, Arthur
Phillips, Dr. Marion


Ammon, Charles George
Hayes, John Henry
Plcton-Turbervill, Edith


Arnott, John
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Pole, Major D. G.


Aske, Sir Robert
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Potts, John S.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Herriotts, J.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Ayles, Walter
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Rathbone, Eleanor


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Raynes, W. R.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Hoffman, P. C.
Richards, R.


Barnes, Alfred John
Hopkin, Daniel
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Barr, James
Hore-Belisha, Leslie.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Batey, Joseph
Horrabin, J. F.
Ritson, J.


Bellamy, Albert
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Romeril, H. G.


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Benson, G.
Johnston, Thomas
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (F[...]nt)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Birkett, W. Norman
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, silvertown)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Blindell, James
Jones, Rt. Hon. Lelf (Camborne)
Sanders, W. S.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Sawyer, G. F.


Bowen, J. W.
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Scott, James


Broad, Francis Alfred
Kelly, W. T.
Scurr, John


Brockway, A. Fenner
Kennedy, Thomas
Sexton, James


Brooke, W.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Brothers, M.
Kinley, J.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis



Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Shillaker, J. F.


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Lathan, G.
Shinwell, E.


Burgess, F. G.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Law, A. (Rosendale)
Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)


Cameron, A. G.
Lawrence, Susan
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Cape, Thomas
Lawson, John James
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Leach, W.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Charleton, H. C.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Chater, Daniel
Lees, J.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Church, Major A. G.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cluse, W. S.
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Logan, David Gilbert
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Longbottom, A. W.
Snell, Harry


Compton, Joseph
Longden, F.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Cove, William G.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Cowan, D. M.
Lowth, Thomas
Sorensen, R.


Daggar, George
Lunn, William
Stamford, Thomas W.


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Strauss, G. R.


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Sullivan, J.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
McElwee, A.
Sutton, J. E


Day, Harry
McEntee, V. L.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Thorne. W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Duncan, Charles
MacLaren, Andrew
Thurtle, Ernest


Ede, James Chuter
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Tinker, John Joseph


Edmunds, J. E.
McShane, John James
Townend, A. E.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
March, S.
Vaughan, D. J.


Elmley, Viscount
Markham, S. F.
Viant, S. P.


Foot, Isaac
Marshall, Fred
Walkden, A. G.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Mathers, George
Walker, J.


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Matters, L. W.
Wallace, H. W.


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Melville, Sir James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Gibbins, Joseph
Messer, Fred
Walters, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Tudor


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Middleton, G.
Watkins, F. C.


Gill, T. H.
Mills, J. E.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)



Gillett, George M.
Milner, Major J.
Wellock, Wilfred


Glassey, A. E.
Montague, Frederick
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Gossling, A. G.
Morley, Ralph
West, F. R.


Gould, F.
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Westwood, Joseph


Granville, E.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Gray, Milner
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, Dr. J. H.(Llanelly)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mort, D. L.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Muff, G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Groves, Thomas E.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Murnin, Hugh
Wise, E. F.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Nathan, Major H. L.



Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Noel Baker, P. J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. T. Henderson.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)



Question, "That the proposed words be there inserted in the Bill," put, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 9.—(Commutation, of obligations to repair by reason of tenure, etc.)

Amendment made In page 10, line 28, leave out the word "walls," and insert instead thereof the word "banks."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

CLAUSE 10.—(Exercise by Catchment Board of powers of drainage board in default.)

Amendment made: In page 12, line 34, leave out the word "power," and insert instead thereof the word "powers."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

CLAUSE 12.—(Power of Minister to en- force performance of duties by Catchment Boards.)

Amendments made: In page 14, line 18, leave out the words "in repair the banks and bed of."

After the word "river," insert the words "in a due state of efficiency."—[Dr. Addison.]

CLAUSE 13.—(Procedure for making orders and confirming schemes.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 14, line 36, to leave out the word "and."
This Amendment and the two subsequent Amendments to this Clause in my name are proposed in order to bring the provisions here in line with the Housing (No. 2) Act and other Acts of this kind.
Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendment made: In page 14, line 38, leave out the words "of those orders," and insert instead thereof the words, "orders under this Part of this Act."—[Dr. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 14, line 39, at the end, to insert the words
and the provisions set out in Part III of that Schedule shall have effect with respect to the validity of such orders under this Part of this Act as are not confirmed by Parliament.

Sir J. LAMB: May I ask what procedure this will entail? Will it mean laying the Order on the Table so many days?

Dr. ADDISON: The effect of the Amendment is to bring the Clause into
line with the provisions of the Housing (No. 2) Act. The effect is that where an Order is not confirmed by Parliament, that is to say, where there is no opposition to an Order, it shall be published in the "London Gazette" stating that the Order comes into force, and naming a place where it can be inspected. If any person wishes to question its validity on the ground that it was not within the powers of the Act, he may within six weeks make an application to the High Court, and the Court can either quash the Order or amend it accordingly. This is the provision in the Housing Act and it is in order to bring this Order into line with other Orders of a similar kind that this Amendment is moved.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 17.—(Constitution of drainage districts and drainage boards outside catchment areas.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 16, line 10, at the end, to insert the words
or if the jurisdiction of the Commissioners extends into a catchment area, for depriving them of their powers outside the catchment area.
This is a case where an area may lay outside the catchment area, and in order to make clear the extent of the jurisdiction of the catchment board, these words are thought to be necessary. I am advised that instead of the words "depriving them of," the word "abrogating," should be substituted.
Amendment to proposed Amendment made: Leave out the words "depriving them of," and insert instead thereof the word "abrogating."—[Dr. Addison.]
Proposed words, as amended, there inserted in the Bill.

CLAUSE 18.—(Provision as to petitions and procedure for making orders.)

Amendment made: In page 17, line 5, after the word "making," insert the words "and validity."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

CLAUSE 20.—(Expenses of Catchment Board.)

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 18, line 38, at the end, to insert the words:
(2) A Catchment Board shall, before incurring any expenses under this Act, pre-
pare, either annually or otherwise, as they may think fit, and submit to the council of every county and county borough the whole or any part of the area of which is within the catchment area an estimate of such expenses, and any such council, if aggrieved by the estimate either on the ground that it is excessive or that the works to which it relates are unnecessary may, within six weeks after the date on which the estimate has been received by the council, appeal to the Minister against the estimate, and the Minister may, after considering any objections made to him, and, if he thinks fit, holding a local public inquiry, make such an order in the matter as he thinks just, and his decision shall be final.
Under the Bill as it stands, the catchment boards can make any plans they like, and put large expense on the county councils. We must remember that the catchment boards are not elective bodies, but bodies set up by the county councils, and although the county councils will be represented, they will have very little representation. These boards can put a large rate on to the county councils without the councils knowing what it is for, or having any chance of objecting. These words will give the county councils the right to appeal to the Minister, and will make it necessary for the catchment boards to inform the county councils before any expenses are incurred.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment.
The county councils are responsible for raising the money and the catchment boards simply precept on them. It is very natural that the county councils would like to have some information as to how much they are going to be asked to subscribe to the boards, and it is only fair that they should know. This Amendment will enable them, before they are asked for the money, and before the plans are put into operation, to know what the catchment boards propose to do. The county councils are now put in the position of not knowing what the plans are, or how much money they are to be asked to raise. One begins to wonder whether this is a drainage Bill at all, and whether it is not an unemployment Bill. It seems to me that these new catchment area boards can employ people without thinking of the question of payment, and without any check from the county councils. For the sake of finding employment they can foist on the area schemes which are not sound and really not drainage schemes at all. The County
Councils' Association have seen the Minister's new Clause dealing with this point, but they are not satisfied, and they wish this new sub-section to be inserted as a further limitation and in order that councils may have some information as to the expenditure which they are likely to have to meet.

Dr. ADDISON: I agree that all the authorities concerned ought to know what it is that a catchment area board is proposing to do, but I suggest that the provisions already in the Bill give generous opportunities for them to be informed. This Amendment would treat a catchment area board as though it were an irresponsible body. As a matter of fact two-thirds of its members are to be representative of the county councils and county boroughs in the area, and we may fairly assume that they will be sensible people; and the same observation applies to the representatives of the internal drainage board. If this Amendment were accepted, before a catchment board could do anything they would have to send to the constituent councils an estimate of the expenditure, give six weeks' notice, and all the rest of it. That is not treating the board as a businesslike body. If we wish them to do their work we must not hamper them at every step even before they start. This Amendment would make their work impossible. In order to secure that catchment boards do not spend too much or too rashly I brought up a new Clause in Committee, and it now appears as Clause 56. That Clause does limit the expenditure which a catchment area board can incur without a public inquiry. Further, Sub-section (5) of Clause 21 provides an opportunity for a council to appeal to the Minister if they think too much is being demanded of them, and the Minister can order an inquiry, and I think that is sufficient.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 3, after the words "county borough," to insert the words "and internal drainage districts."
The purpose of the original Amendment is to secure that the county councils, who have to find the money for the activities of the catchment board, shall know what those activities are likely to be; and if that is thought to be essential in the case of county councils I submit that it is even more important that internal drainage dis-
tricts should also be placed in a position to know what their expenditure is likely to be.

Mr. SPEAKER: As no one seconds the Amendment of the hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson), it cannot be proceeded with.

Sir J. LAMB: I wish to support the original Amendment. Anyone who has had any experience of the work of county councils knows the difficulty they have in budgeting, and how important it is that they should know what charges are likely to be placed upon them when they are considering their financial plans, and the rates which they will have to levy. This proposal accords with the action taken by Government Departments, which are saying to county councils: "You must budget beforehand, so that we may know the amount of grant we shall have to pay you." In the same way county councils should have some pre-knowledge of the calls likely to be made upon them, in order that they may so adjust their rates as to avoid unnecessarily heavy burdens being placed upon the ratepayers at any particular period and in respect of one particular object, to the detriment, possibly, of other obligations for which they have to provide.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I have put down a similar Amendment on the next Clause, and perhaps I may put forward my points on this Amendment. The House will be puzzled to understand the differences over this Bill. The hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson) and I look at it from entirely opposite points of view. Here is certain work to be done, work which is more or less useful, and the question is, Who is to pay for it? The hon. Member says the ratepayers at large ought to pay for it. I say that the internal drainage boards, which in the past have collected this money as an owners' rate from the people who benefit from the expenditure, ought to pay. That is the fundamental difference between them. This Bill is introduced because, in certain places, people have refused to pay these rates; we are coming upon ratepayers who do not directly benefit from the expenditure of money on drainage. The question is, Ought these catchment boards, which have the power to say how the money shall be spent,
operate without consulting the bodies which have to find the money, namely, the county councils and the county borough councils? I take it this Amendment is directed towards securing a consultation between the catchment area boards when they have decided on the schemes to be undertaken and the authorities who have to pay, and that seems to be a reasonable suggestion. The Minister has told us that he wants experts on the catchment boards, people who know something about the job. That is all the more reason why the boards should consult with the ordinary representatives of the ratepayers before a scheme is put into operation. The incentive of a specialist board is to spend money, and the incentive of a county council is to stop the money being spent. We have to harmonise the two points of view, and I suggest that it can best be done by some sort of pre-consultation before schemes are put through.
Let me take the case of Staffordshire. Suppose the Trent Catchment Area Board, which embraces, perhaps, a dozen counties, decides that the best thing to do is to spend money on the lower river. I think it would be desirable in the public interest that they should consult with the Staffordshire County Council, which has got to find the money for this scheme, which is not benefiting them, in order, it may be, to show that the next scheme may be one for the upper Trent. Otherwise, there will be among the ratepayers in Staffordshire the bitterest feeling at having an additional rate which may be 3d. in the £, put upon them for canalising the lower Trent. It would make the Bill much more tolerable to the people who have to find the money if they felt they had some voice in saving how much was to be spent. My right hon. Friend will say that the county council of Staffordshire will be represented, that it will have at least one representative on the catchment board. But what is one representative among the representatives of all the other county boroughs and counties and internal drainage boards? The voice of that representative may be disregarded. If consultation has to take place it will be a check upon expenditure for the benefit of one district for which another district has to pay. The Amendment may make the Bill much more tolerable to the people who have to pay, and in
the long run the Government and the Labour party will find it extremely serious if the people who have to pay do not approve of the way in which the money is spent.

Mr. WELLS: I wish to support the Amendment, and I agree very much with what the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) has said. We are placing financial burdens on county councils without giving them any opportunity of saying whether they wish the money spent or not. I would like to examine for a moment perhaps the only scheme which is in being to-day. It is, I suppose, a scheme which will be put into force as soon as the Bill becomes law, and it involves an expenditure of £4,000,000 at the mouth of the Ouse, of course, spread over a term of years. If the catchment board do not agree to the expenditure they will be called to order by the Minister, who has full power to say that they shall carry out the work. That scheme will impose a tremendous obligation on the county councils in the area, because a rate of one halfpenny over the whole of the catchment area raises only £6,200. We must have regard to the immense financial burdens which are going to be cast on county councils and county boroughs. If we had any limitation, if there were any appeals to a tribunal, that might relieve our fears, but as the Bill stands to-day the Minister is the final arbiter of how much money is to be spent. All we ask is that the county councils should know what is being done by the catchment board. The work will never be carried through if it is undertaken in the teeth of the disapproval of every local authority. There must be some agreement, and this Amendment is one means of getting agreement.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I am afraid that I cannot support this Amendment. Supposing, for example, that a sea wall were broken down suddenly. The responsible authority could not budget for that. It would mean that all the different drain.

age authorities would have to budget in advance, and submit their budgets to the various county councils. I do not see how that is possible. One of the weaknesses of this Bill is that it embraces all sea defences. I do not mean erosion, but defences against storms and such defences as those which are necessary in districts like Romney Marsh. If the county council were called upon to provide a defence in that case, the work would have to be started at once, and it would be impossible to submit an estimate to the county councils. For these reasons, I cannot support the Amendment.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: This Amendment has been brought before the House at the instance of the County Councils' Association, and they support it for the same reason that the Minister of Agriculture has opposed it. I know hon. Members want the catchment boards to get on with the job, but we wish to place a very real check upon this kind of expenditure. We suggest that catchment boards might make an estimate for three succeeding years. There is a precedent for this course in the case of education authorities, where the Board of Education require the education authorities to make estimates for three years. When we consider the catchment boards rates all over the country, it is evident that the aggregate sum will come to a very large amount, and therefore it is not unreasonable to ask for the check on such expenditure which is provided in this Estimate. We want to know how much money will have to be provided in the case of the Thames Valley. We are all aware that at the present time the urgent need is rigid and strict economy—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] This Amendment affords an opportunity to place a reasonable check on expenditure, and I trust that the Minister of Agriculture will agree to accept it.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 131; Noes, 229.

Division No. 465.]
AYES.
[6.51 p.m.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Birkett. W. Norman
Buckingham, Sir H.


Atholl, Duchess of
Blindell, James
Burton, Colonel H. W.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Butler, R. A.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward


Berry, Sir George
Boyce, H. L.
Carver, Major W. H.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Brass, Captain Sir William
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ramsbotham, H.


Christle, J. A.
Haslam, Henry C.
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.


Colfox, Major William Phillp
Heneage, Lieut-Colonel Arthur P.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Colville, Major D. J.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Cranborne, Viscount
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Hurd, Percy A.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Groom-Johnson, R. P.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Salmon, Major I.


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merloneth)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Savery, S. S.


Duckworth, G. A. V.
Lamb, Sir J. O.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Elmley, Viscount
Lymington, Viscount
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


England, Colonel A.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W' morland)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Tinne, J. A.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Fermoy, Lord
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Train, J.


Fielden, E. B.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Ford, Sir P. J.
Meller, R. J.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Warrender, Sir Victor


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Glassey, A. E.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gower, Sir Robert
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Granville, E.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Wells, Sydney R.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Muirhead, A. J.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Gray. Milner
Nathan, Major H. L.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Greaves-Lord, Sir
Walter Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Withers, Sir John James


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. Jonn
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Womersley, W. J.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)



Gunston, Captain D. W.
Penny, Sir George
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Lieut.-Colonel Acland-Troyte and


Hanbury, C.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Brigadier-General Clifton Brown.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cluse, W. S.
Hayes, John Henry


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Altchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Herriotts, J.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Compton, Joseph
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Alpass, J. H.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Ammon, Charles George
Cove, William G.
Hoffman, P. C.


Arnott, John
Cowan, D. M.
Hopkin, Daniel


Asks, Sir Robert
Daggar, George
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Attlee, Clement Richard
Dalton, Hugh
Horrabin, J. F.


Ayles, Walter
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Day, Harry
Johnston, Thomas


Barnes, Alfred John
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)


Barr, James
Duncan, Charles
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Batey, Joseph
Ede, James Chuter
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Bellamy, Albert
Edmunds, J. E.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Kelly, W. T.


Benson, G.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Kennedy, Thomas


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Foot, Isaac
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Kinley, J.


Bowen, J. W.
Gibbins, Joseph
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Lathan, G.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gill, T. H.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gillett, George M.
Law, A. (Rossendale)


Bromley. J.
Gossling, A. G.
Lawrence, Susan


Brooke, W.
Gould, F.
Lawson, John James


Brothers, M.
Greenwood, Rt Hon. A. (Colne).
Leach, W.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Groves, Thomas E.
Lees, J.


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Buchanan, G.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Burgess, F. G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Logan, David Gilbert


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Longbottom, A. W.


Cameron, A. G.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Longden, F.


Cape, Thomas
Hardie, George D.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Harris, Percy A.
Lowth, Thomas


Charleton, H. C.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Lunn, William


Chater, Daniel
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)


Church, Major A. G.
Haycock, A. W.
McElwee, A.


Clarke, J. S.
Hayday, Arthur
McEntee, V. L.




McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Pole, Major D. G.
Sorensen, R.


McKinlay, A.
Potts, John S.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Richards, R.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Strauss, G. R.


McShane, John James
Riley, F. F. (Stockton[...]on-Tees)
Sullivan, J.


March, S.
Ritson, J.
Sutton, J. E.


Marcus, M.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Markham, S. F.
Romeril, H. G.
Thorne. W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Marshall, Fred
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Mathers, George
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Tinker, John Joseph


Matters, L. W.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Townend, A. E.


Melville, Sir James
Sanders, W. S.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Messer, Fred
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Vaughan, D. J.


Middleton, G.
Sawyer, G. F.
Viant, S. P.


Mills, J. E.
Scurr, John
Walkden, A. G.


Milner, Major J.
Sexton, James
Walker, J.


Morley, Ralph
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Walters, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Tudor


Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Watkins, F. C.


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Shillaker, J. F.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Mort, D. L.
Shinwell, E.
Wellock, Wilfred


Muff, G.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Muggeridge, H. T.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
West, F. R.


Murnin, Hugh
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Westwood, Joseph


Noel Baker, P. J.
Sinkinson, George
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladyweod)


Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Pelln, John Henry
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Paling, Wilfrid
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Palmer, E. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Perry, S. F.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Wise, E. F.


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snell, Harry



Phillips, Dr. Marion
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. William Whiteley.

Mr. SPEAKER: Lieut. - Colonel Heneage !

Colonel WEDGWOOD: On a point of Order. Are you not accepting either of my Amendments—(1) in page 18, line 41, to leave out from the word "the," to the end of the Sub-section, and to insert instead thereof the words "annual values thereof as hereinafter defined," and (2) in page 19, line 15, to leave out the word "rateable," and to insert instead thereof the word "annual"?

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not select them.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: These are very important Amendments which decide what the incidence of the rate is to be in different areas, and I submit that that is one of the things which ought to be discussed by the House.

Mr. SPEAKER: That may be so, but I do not select them.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to move, in page 19, line 18, at the end, to insert the words:
(5) The general expenses of a catchment area shall, as far as drainage is concerned, not be more than fifty per cent. of the Treasury contributions and in the case of sea defence not more than twenty-five per cent.
This Amendment raises the whole question of what is in the Bill as far as sea defences are concerned. The House will remember that at the beginning of the Session the Government introduced the Coast Protection Bill, but, for reasons which they alone understand, it was not proceeded with. In this Bill, by the simple substitution of words in regard to the defence against sea water, they are certainly introducing a portion of the Coast Protection Bill. That matter was very little discussed upstairs. It was found out rather late, and the whole of the implications and difficulties attached to it were not thoroughly gone into. If any reason for the recommittal of this Bill is needed, it is to be found in the question of how the Bill affects sea defence. The Amendment proposes a check on the catchment area spending authorities so as to bring them into line with the Treasury, or perhaps it should be put the other way round.
I want to know what line the Government take on the question whether the catchment area expenses are a national charge or whether they are to be entirely borne by the ratepayer? We in Lincolnshire feel this matter very strongly. The sea in some parts is the constant enemy of agriculturists and urban authorities. There have been
cases where the sea wall has been breached and heavy losses incurred which the inhabitants have been quite incapable of paying so that the Government have had to come down with big sums of money. We do not want charity from the Government, but just rights, and, if the Government are prepared to accept the principle, perhaps with some modification, we shall be very glad. I hope the Government will say definitely how the sea defence rate is affected by this Bill, and whether it is considered as an ordinary drainage rate which should be allowed to fall on the urban and rural authorities. So far, we have had no proper explanation, either upstairs or on Second Reading as to sea defence.
There is another Amendment, which I understand Mr. Speaker will call, which would give the Government a better opportunity of dealing with the sea defence rate, but I hope they will say here and now how they propose to allot the Treasury contribution. Let me give one word of warning. This question of the Treasury contribution is going to be a very sore subject. We shall have representations from different districts and silver-tongued orators who will get these contributions. If we adopt a principle of the 50 per cent. kind we shall have a better foundation on which to go, because the needs of the agriculturists and the miner are very hard to set against each other, for there is necessity in both areas. I suggest the Government would be glad to find some principle on which to rely in making the allotments. We want to keep down the rates as far as possible, but the Government have a reputation for putting up taxes and rates. Let them accept this principle, and they will have some kind of foundation to go on. The Government are accused of putting forward this Bill in a tremendous hurry as an unemployment scheme. We regard that as a very great danger. If the Government are pressed from the unemployment point of view, we may have some kind of drainage works which we do not want, and which are much too costly to maintain, and the maintenance of which will fall very heavily on the public. For these reasons, I think this Amendment will give the Government a very good opportunity of saying where they stand in this matter.

Sir J. LAMB: I beg to second the Amendment.
I admit that we want to put a limiting power upon the expenditure of the boards. This is one way in which we hope we can limit the spending capacity of the boards, and consequently the burden to be placed later on the authorities who have to find the money. It is quite obvious that we, in this House of Commons, cannot rule as to what the amount of the grant shall be, because that would be out of order. Otherwise, I would have liked to see the grant stated, but that would not be in order. The only thing we can do is to say that the amount to be taken by the spending authorities shall be a certain proportion of the grant received. That is unashamedly the object of the Amendment, and I beg to support it on those grounds.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I am rather surprised to hear the hon. and gallant Member describing this Bill as an unemployment scheme brought forward in a hurry. I happen to be one of the unfortunate persons who sat upon the Royal Commission four years ago. That Commission, through its Chairman, was urged time and time again to hurry on with the work because of the urgency of this Measure as far as land drainage is concerned. If it were such a matter of urgency from the point of view of drainage in 1926, surely it can hardly be described as being brought forward in a hurry in 1930? Of course, as has been said, this Amendment is designed for the purpose of limiting the expenditure of the catchment area authorities. It is impossible in this Bill to limit the reasonable and legitimate expenditure of catchment area authorities in this way. In the Committe stage my right hon. Friend in various ways met the criticism which was submitted in that regard. He has put a limitation upon catchment area authorities, both in regard to the total amount they can spend upon schemes, and the amount that can be levied by rates in connection with the scheme; that is to say, schemes cannot go forward until a pubic inquiry has been held where all the interests concerned have a full opportunity of expressing their views.
Hon. Members opposite seem to be losing all confidence and faith in public administration. These boards are composed of representatives who are defi-
nitely elected authorities. They will be men of very wide knowledge of public work and wide experience, and it is absurd to suggest that those bodies, when constituted, will simply lay themselves out to incur as much expenditure as possible, regardless of the interests of those people who will have to meet the expenditure. They will be composed of people within the area, and I have yet to learn that that type of mind is a type that will incur expenditure for the sake of incurring it.
The only other point raised under the Amendment is in regard to the question of half the Government contribution. That is another attempt by my hon. and gallant Friend to carry his point and to insert a minimum of contribution which the Government will make. The answer, which has ben made on many occasions, is that the schemes will differ so materially both in extent and in relation to the area which carries the burden, that no fixed sum can possibly be allocated as far as the Government contribution is concerned. It must be left to be determined on the merits of the case, and the capacity of the area concerned to carry the burden involved in the scheme.

Sir J. LAMB: That is not a fixed sum, but in proportion.

Mr. SMITH: Yes, but obviously the contribution which the Government would make must vary from scheme to scheme. You might have a large expenditure on a scheme within an area which is limited as far as rateable value is concerned, and it is absurd to suggest that the contribution there must he the same as for a scheme in the larger area which has a larger rateable value with which to meet the obligations. There must be elasticity in this matter, and therefore the Amendment cannot be accepted. This principle applies to all schemes, and any contribution that is made must be determined ultimately by the merits of the case.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: The Parliamentary Secretary has told us that he was a member of the Royal Commission upon whose recommendations this Bill is founded, and I would remind him of certain recommendations of that Commission. We do not find two of its most important recommendations in this Bill. One of them is the provision of the Appeal Tribunal which was eliminated
by the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary upstairs. The other recommendation is that great caution should be exercised in setting up machinery for this Bill, because of the depressed state of agriculture. I ask the hon. Gentleman whether agriculture is less depressed in 1930 than it was in 1927? We desire, especially, to place checks on the expenditure that will take place under the Bill, because we look upon it as a dangerous Bill which may be used by a needy Government, at its wits ends to provide employment. Therefore, we wish to put checks and to see that the expenditure under the Bill is productive expenditure. Here is a letter from the office of the County Councils Association, which says:
In default of a guarantee of a minimum grant of 50 per cent., which would not prevent the Minister from differentiating between rich and poor areas, as is done today in the case of roads, there can be no really adequate safeguard for the local authorities. As the Financial Clause now stands, it is open to the Government to make whatever grants, small or large, they like towards the expenses of catchment boards, and I am not sufficiently optimistic to visualise a Minister of Agriculture strong enough to hold out for reasonably large grants against a needy Chancellor of the Exchequer, either in this or any other administration.
This Amendment appears to us to be an eminently reasonable Amendment, and to provide a very fair check, and I would ask the Minister to accept it.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: This is the first Amendment that we have had on what is to my mind the most important part of this Bill, that is to say, the Financial Clause. All the people in a catchment area, whether they are concerned as uplanders who will pay towards the county council's contribution, or whether they are in internal districts and will pay on the demand made upon the internal districts by the catchment board, are immediately concerned in the financial provisions, and this Amendment raises that point at once, in that it asks that the State contribution shall be 50 per cent. of the whole.

Mr. ALPASS: If the hon. Member will pardon my interrupting him, I think he is under a misapprehension. If this Amendment is read properly, it will be seen that it contemplates the Treasury finding two-thirds of the cost. The
Amendment speaks of 50 per cent. of the Treasury contributions—not, as the hon. Member says, 50 per cent. of the total cost.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: It says that the general expenses of a catchment board, so far as drainage is concerned, shall not be more than 50 per cent. of the Treasury contribution. If the Treasury contribution is 50 per cent., the contributions of the county council, internal boards, and so on will be the other 50 per cent.

HON. MEMBERS: No; 25 per cent.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I am corrected for the moment. Since that is the case, I am inclined to support this Amendment even more strongly than I was before. I can assure the Minister that the uplanders and the lowlanders will join together and try to get as much from the State contribution as they possibly can; and, having got as much as they can from the State contribution towards the catchment board's activities in the main channel, we shall commence our little domestic quarrels between ourselves as to who shall pay the balance, and in what proportions that balance shall be paid. We have known in the past great political differences, such that those who have been friends have at election times thrown rotten eggs at each other. We have read in the past of religious differences which even reached the point of bringing people to the State. But I want to assure the House that all the political and religious differences of the past will never equal in intensify the great diversity between the uplander and the lowlander with regard to contributions towards the expenses of this Bill; and I can forsee, and the Minister will foresee, the little bear-garden that the catchment board will be in the future when the uplanders on the catchment board have to try to agree with the lowlanders on the board as to what is a fair proportion between the two.
We are concerned with this Bill from an agricultural point of view. Its object is to benefit agriculture. Let us accept that. The only burden put upon agriculture by this Bill is the demand upon the internal district boards for their contribution. Agriculture will not directly bear any proportion of the State contribution. Agriculture, qua agri-
culture, will not bear any share of the precept upon the county councils towards the finance of this Bill, because agriculture is de-rated; but agriculture, as regards the internal district boards, is going to be charged with some form of contribution. It is on behalf of the internal districts on the one hand, and particularly on behalf of agriculture on the other, that I ask that there shall be some limit to the liability which the internal districts have to bear, and which agriculture generally will have to bear under this Bill.
I should like the Minister, if possible, on this Amendment, to give me some assurance that there will not be placed upon the internal district boards and upon agriculture generally an unlimited liability under this Bill. We realise that the majority on the catchment board—20 out of the 30—will represent upland areas, and only 10 out of the 30 will represent the lowland areas or the internal drainage districts. What we fear is that the majority on these catchment boards, that is to say, the representatives of the upland areas, will use their power on the board to exploit the agricultural industry and to exploit the internal districts and the lowlanders in order to save the uplanders expense. I want to know whether it is possible at this stage for the Minister to give me some assurance or some information that I may take back to agriculture and to the internal districts, that the internal districts will not be exploited in this matter. If he can give me that assurance, I shall look much more favourably on his Bill than I otherwise should.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson) was, as usual, perfectly clear and quite out of order; and, also as usual, I am in complete opposition to him, and am glad on this occasion to be able to support the Government. After all, we must look at the facts. I want the State to make adequate contributions, and I want the State to make its contributions on a just basis. Next year we shall have the Land Valuation Bill, and then the State will be able to make a contribution, not of 50 per cent., but of 100 per cent, if it. likes, so long as it bases its contribution upon the value of the lands which are improved by the drainage. I am strongly in favour of a high con-
tribution as long as it does not come from the wrong people, and I cannot help thinking that the representative of the internal drainage boards, if I may so call him, will be better when he gets his valuation, and is able to collect his money for the drainage board from the people who get the benefit from it.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I am sorry that I have again to differ from my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson), but I cannot see why we should be under the thumb of the Treasury. As I read this Amendment, we must only spend half the Treasury contribution; that is to say, the Treasury dictate the amount that we shall spend. To that I cannot possibly agree. I do not agree, either, that agriculturists as a whole would support this Amendment; in fact, I am certain that they would not. As regards the Drainage Boards which are in existence at present, I think they are noted more for their parsimony than for anything else, and, therefore, I have no fear that, if the Boards are constituted in future as they are at the present time—if, as I think will be the case, the same men serve on them—there is very little fear that they are going to be extravagant, whatever Government may be in power.

Dr. ADDISON: I am sure hon. Members will recognise that the diversity of opinion in the House is ample justification for my not accepting this Amendment. There is another point which has rather been lost sight of, and that is that the diversity of values in these catchment areas makes it quite impossible to attempt to lay down a hard-and-fast rule. In the flooded area which has been referred to, the land, as I know, is in urgent need of drainage. In that area there was a vast inundation last year; but the Amendment which we are now discussing would have made it practically impossible for the authorities in that area to do any good without holding inquiries and going through all the other preliminary procedure. In than area a ½d. rate yields only £3,494 a year—

Colonel WEDGWOOD: It is all in Somerset.

Dr. ADDISON: I think not. On the other hand, a ½d. rate in the Trent area
produces, not £3,000, but £44,117. How could any figure be laid down that would apply with any chance of fairness in both of these cases? In the Somerset area there might be a substantial Treasury contribution, but it would not be possible to have the same figure applying to the two. As to the feud between the upland and the lowland areas, we had some slight illustration of that in the Committee Room upstairs. The only time when the two join forces is when they think they can get more out of the Treasury, but the money is paid by the same people, even if it comes out of the Treasury. From what the hon. Member said, I am quite sure that, so far as maintenance and administration expenses are concerned, every catchment area should be governed by the clearly fair principle that as far as possible the expense should be distributed over the whole area. So far as improvements and so on are concerned, the rates in internal drainage areas are levied on a separate basis; but, putting those considerations on one side, I am quite sure that an Amendment of this kind would be impossible to work and most unjust in its application.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: In my view this is the most important Amendment that we have had to consider this afternoon, and I am very sorry that the Government refuse to accept it. My hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson) appealed for agriculture, and I entirely agree with his appeal, but he seemed to suggest that the lowlands are the only places where agriculture is carried on. I can assure him, however, that there is just as much agriculture in the uplands as in the lowlands. As I have said, however, with his appeal in the name of agriculture I entirely agree. It appears to me that the Government have made a complete mistake in dealing with this Amendment. They seem to think that we are suggesting a fixed rate, but we are doing nothing of the sort. We are suggesting a fixed minimum rate, and the contribution can be as much above that as possible. As regards the comparison between the Somerset and Trent areas, if Somerset want, as they do, to spend a large sum of money, and they can only raise from a ½d. rate £3,400, that means that the Minister will have to give more from the Treasury, and, instead of giving 50 per cent., he might give 75 per cent., or 80 per
cent., or even 90 per cent. There is nothing to stop him from doing that; there is no suggestion whatever that the contribution should be at a fixed rate. Both the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary seem to think that we regard 50 per cent. as a fixed rate, but it is a minimum rate, which is an entirely different thing. This is a matter on which the county councils, and people in the country generally, feel a great amount of uneasiness. They think that, unless we can have this Amendment put in, there will be no possible guard against

increased expenditure. The Government are really doing the Bill and themselves a great disservice in refusing to accept the Amendment. Can anyone imagine the right hon. Gentleman going to the Chancellor of the Exchequer asking for £500,000 and standing up to him when the Chancellor of the Exchequer says, "You can only have £220,000"?

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 125; Noes, 217.:

Division No. 466.]
AYES.
[7.33 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fielden, E. B.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Aske, Sir Robert
Foot, Isaac
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Atholl, Duchess of
Ford, Sir P. J.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)


Beery, Sir George
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Muirhead, A. J.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Bird, Ernest Roy
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Birkett, W. Norman
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Blindell, James
Gower, Sir Robert
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Granville. E.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Ramsbotham, H.


Boyce, H. L.
Gray, Milner
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd'., Hexham)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Salmon, Major I.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Butler, R. A.
Haslam, Henry C.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd,Henley)
Savery, S. S.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.Sir.J.A. (Birm., W,)
Hurd, Percy A.
Somerville. A. A. (Windsor)


Christle, J. A.
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cockerlil, Brig.-General Sir George
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Iveagh, Countess of
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Colville, Major D. J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Thomson, Sir F.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Cowan, D. M.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Train, J.


Cranborne, Viscount
Knox, Sir Alfred
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Wallace, Capt. D. E (Hornsey)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Ward, Lieut-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Wells, Sydney R.


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Eden, Captain Anthony
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Winterton. Rt. Hon. Earl


Eimley, Viscount
Meller, R. J.
Withers, Sir John James


England, Colonel A.
Millar, J. D.
Womersley, W. J.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)



Everard, W. Lindsay
Mond, Hon. Henry
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Lieut.-Colonel Heneage and Sir Joseph Lamb.


Fermoy, Lord
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bellamy, Albert
Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Buchanan, G.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Burgess, F. G.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Benson, G.
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Cameron, A. G.


Alpass, J. H.
Bondfield, Rt, Hon. Margaret
Cape, Thomas


Ammon, Charles George
Bowen, J. W.
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)


Arnott, John
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Charleton, H. C.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Broad, Francis Alfred
Chater, Daniel


Ayles, Walter
Brockway, A. Fenner
Clarke, J. S.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Bromley, J.
Cluse, W. S.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Brooke, W.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.


Barnes, Alfred John
Brothers, M.
Cocks, Frederick Seymour


Barr, James
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)


Batey, Joseph
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Compton, Joseph


Cove, William G.
Lawrence, Susan
Salter, Dr. Alfrea


Daggar, George
Leach, W.
Samuel, Rt. Hon, Sir H. (Darwen)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lees, J.
Sanders, W. S.


Day, Harry
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Sawyer, G. F.


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Scurr, John


Duncan, Charles
Logan, David Gilbert
Sexton, James


Ede, James Chuter
Longbottom, A. W.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Edge, Sir William
Longden, F.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Edmunds, J. E.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Shillaker, J. F.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lowth, Thomas
Shinwell, E.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Lunn, William
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Simon, E. D.(Manch'ter, Withington)


Gibbins, Joseph
McElwee, A.
Sinkinson, George


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
McEntee, V. L.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Gill, T. H.
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Gillett, George M.
Mckinlay, A.
Smith, H. B. Lees. (Kelghley)


Gossling, A. G.
MacLaren, Andrew
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Gould, F.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
McShane, John James
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Greenwood, Rt. hon. A. (Colne).
March, S.
Snell, Harry


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Marcus, M.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Groves, Thomas E.
Markham, S. F.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Marshall, Fred
Sorensen, R.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mathers, George
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Matters, L. W.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Melville, Sir James
Strauss, G. R.


Hardle, George D.
Messer, Fred
Sullivan, J.


Harris, Percy A.
Middleton, G.
Sutton, J. E.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Mills, J. E.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Milner, Major J.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Haycock, A. W.
Montague, Frederick
Thurtle, Ernest


Heyday, Arthur
Morley, Ralph
Tinker, John Joseph


Hayes, John Henry
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Townend, A. E.


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Mort, D. L.
Vaughan, D. J.


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Muff, G.
V[...]ant, S. P.


Herriotts, J.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Walkden, A. G.


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Murnin, Hugh
Walker, J.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hoffman, P. C.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Watkins, F. C.


Hopkin, Daniel
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Palin, John Henry
Wayland, Sir William A.


Horrabin, J. F.
Palmer, E. T.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wellock, Wilfred


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Perry, S. f.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Johnston, Thomas
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
West, F. R.


Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Westwood, Joseph


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Pole, Major D. G.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Potts, John S.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Kelly, W. T.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Kennedy, Thomas
Richards, R.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Kinley, J.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)



Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Lathan, G.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Mr. Paling and Mr. William Whiteley.


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Romeril, H. G.



Law, A. (Rosendale)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.

CLAUSE 22.—(Precepts issued by Catch- ment Board.)

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 21, line 19, at the end, to insert the words:
Provided that the amount payable shall in no case exceed a halfpenny rate.
I move this out of a sense of gratitude. It is to restore the Bill to the position in which it was when it left the House of Lords. I should be an ingrate if I did not pay my testimony to the merits of the Bill as it left that Chamber and I hope when we are defeated here, as we shall be, that in another place the Bill may be restored to its pristine
virtue. There is another reason. I owe a special debt of gratitude to the County Councils Association. They also want this Amendment. I hope they will ultimately get it. It is possible to carry on all the drainage schemes that the right hon. Gentleman wants to carry on, it is possible to spend £30,000,000 if you think that expenditure is worth while, without
exceeding the ½d. rate if you put this Amendment into the Bill. It means, however, that you are going to put more upon the internal drainage boards instead. If the money is to be spent, it had better be raised from the internal drainage boards than from the ratepayers. The ratepayers have had a
pretty bad three years of it. They derated agricultural land and shoved it on to the householders. They have taken the roads and put them on to the householders. All these things have been taken off agriculture and put on to the ordinary common or garden ratepayer. Now this Bill comes along and suggests that the one rate that is left upon agriculture, which was collected by the internal drainage boards from those people who benefited by the money spent on drainage, shall be passed off the shoulders of the people who ought to pay it and put on to the unfortunate ratepayers. This has gone on ever since I have been in Parliament, and before For the last 35 years they have been shifting what they call the burdens upon agriculture, which are really the burdens on the landlord, on to the general public.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I do not want to interrupt the right hon. and gallant Gentleman.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Then do not. This board collected its funds either from the Treasury—and we have just arranged that the Treasury shall supply unlimited funds as soon as they can place a tax on land values—or from the ratepayer or the internal drainage board. These are the three people who will contribute to the expenses of all these schemes. I am seeking in this Amendment to limit the amount which is to be found by the unfortunate ratepayer and leave the people who are benefiting to pay something towards it. The tendency of this Bill, as I shall be able to explain upon the Third Reading, is to relieve landlords of this country of their burden and put it upon other people. I think everybody will realise that, when the next Election comes along the ratepayers will have something to say about this Bill. It will not be my fault if they do not. Let us make their grievances against the Labour party as small as possible. Let us limit to one halfpenny in the £ what the ratepayers have to pay; let us make the owners' rate to the internal drainage board as much as possible and the charge on the ratepayers as small as possible. It is not a question of the lowlanders, but a question of the whole of the public of this country against the few people who own the land of the country. When that struggle comes along it is not a
matter for committees, but for the public to decide, and they will have something to say on a Measure which takes the burden deliberately off the shoulders of the landlords and puts it upon the shoulders of the ratepayers of this country.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I disagree absolutely with what the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has said, but at the same time I am inclined to agree to his Amendment, because I am sure that he
has misinterpreted its meaning. He has assumed that his Amendment, which is a proviso that the amount payable shall in no case exceed a halfpenny rate, is adapted to the precept which the catchment board makes upon the county council. For the sake of clarity, I will read the Clause:
A Catchment Board may issue precepts to the councils of counties and county boroughs and to internal drainage hoards requiring payment of any amount payable by, apportioned upon, or required to be contributed by those councils and boards, under either of the two last preceding sections, and a council or an internal drainage hoard shall pay, in accordance with any precept so issued to it, the amount thereby demanded.
The right hon. and gallant Gentleman wishes to add:
Provided that the amount payable shall in no case exceed a halfpenny rate.
My interpretation of that proposal is that neither a county rate nor a rate upon the internal district drainage board can exceed a halfpenny. Therefore, though I absolutely disagree with the speech of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, I could agree with this limitation, if it were possible, on the internal district rate. I agree that there should be some equality of treatment as between the uplanders and the lowlanders. I do not know whether the right hon. and gallant Gentleman appreciates the point that the precept made to the county council is payable not only by the uplanders but by the lowlanders. They will be obliged as lowland areas to meet that precept, but over and above that they will have to meet the demand made upon them by the catchment board as an internal drainage district. Therefore, the internal drainage
district is rated twice under this Bill. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman may go home quite happy with the knowledge that the land will have its fair proportion to the expenses of this Measure. My hon.
Friend says, "More." It is because I am afraid that it will be more that I desire equality of treatment between the uplanders and the lowlanders.

Dr. ADDISON: I am sure that we shall all have been interested to know that the right hon. and gallant Member below the Gangway has found a friend in the Upper House, but this matter does not appear to be the same as that about which the hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson) is thinking. It was because I saw that he was about to rise that I remained seated. I thought that he might probably discern the weakness in the Amendment of my right hon. and gallant Friend. It is obvious that my right hon. and gallant Friend will not get what he wants to obtain by his Amendment. He wants to secure that the landowners of the internal drainage districts, who, it is assumed, will benefit, shall pay their share, but by this Amendment he limits the burden which can be placed upon those persons to a halfpenny rate because they are included in the scope of the Clause as well as the county councils. The Amendment therefore really defeats his purpose. I would suggest to him that his purpose is really met by the powers of the internal drainage boards to levy, as they do levy, and as they have power in the Bill to levy, rates for new works or improvements as owners' rates in the internal drainage area. That is the practice now, and this is the way in which to deal with it. As far as a halfpenny rate is concerned, it is necessary to give the House a simple illustration of what a halfpenny rate will produce. In one particular area, a halfpenny would bring in £194, and in the Thames area it would raise £27,000. The Amendment of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman would not enable him to get what he desires. I am glad that he is at one with another place in a desire to tax land values.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I feel that I ought to withdraw this Amendment, although I would prefer that it should be negatived. I want to strengthen the hands of the House of Lords in putting this Amendment back. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Brigadier-General BROWN: On a point of Order. If the right hon. and gallant
Member withdraws his Amendment, shall I be in order in moving the next Amendment, which stands in my name and which is actually the Amendment which another place put into the Bill.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member will be able to move his Amendment after this Amendment has been withdrawn.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Brigadier-General BROWN: I beg to move, in page 21, line 19, at the end, to insert the words:
(2) The amount demanded by any precept issued by a Catchment Board to the councils of the counties concerned and which would fall to be paid within any one financial year shall not without the consent of the majority of the councils concerned exceed the sum which would be produced by a rate of one half of a penny in the pound levied in the county on the rateable value of the hereditaments in that part of the county situate within the catchment area.
(3) Where the council of a county are at the date of the passing of this Act liable for any drainage expenses the amount demanded by any precept issued to them by a Catchment Board together with the annual charge of such expenses shall not, without the consent of the council, exceed in any one financial year the sum which would be produced by a rate of three farthings in the pound levied in the county on the rateable value of the hereditaments situate within the catchment area.
This is the actual Amendment which was proposed in another place with the object of limiting the expenses. The Minister has already pointed out the different amounts which a halfpenny rate produces in the case of various drainage boards. He could make up the amount from the Treasury grant which he has already promised and in respect of which there is a Clause in the Bill. The National Farmers' Union and the Berkshire County Council are not at all satisfied with the Clause with which the Minister has been good enough to try and meet them. They do not think that the Bill is worth having unless the proposal of this Amendment is restored. I should like to point out that some limitation is evidently admitted in the Memorandum to the Bill, because it says:
Although there is nothing contained in the Bill in its present form as to any Government contribution towards the carrying out of suitable drainage works, it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to insert in the Bill in the House of
Commons, a clause empowering the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries to make grants.
He has done that, but the Clause I am afraid does not give satisfaction and shows the necessity for limitation. Later on the Memorandum says:
In the first place the rateable value of the different catchment areas, which is now in the course of being ascertained, varies very considerably. Secondly, until the Catchment Boards have had an opportunity of surveying their rivers, no reliable estimate can be formed as to the cost of necessary works. Thirdly, the Catchment Boards are entitled to obtain a portion of their revenue from the Internal Drainage Boards within their area.
With these very uncertain factors the bodies concerned feel that the limitation which was put in in another place was the only way in which to deal with the matter at the present time. The Memorandum also points out that the money to be spent may amount to £15,000,000 or more, and that fact, therefore, shows the necessity for some limitation. If the areas are limited to a halfpenny rate and the amount is made up by a Government grant, it will be the fairest way to deal with schemes. I hope that this Amendment will favourably be considered.

Colonel Sir GEORGE COURTHOPE: I beg to second the Amendment. As the Minister knows, I am a friend of this Bill, but I urge him, in the interests of his own Bill, to accept this Amendment or some similar limitation of the burden to be put upon the rates. The great public objection, and one not without foundation—the great fear—which has been aroused by this Bill centres very largely round the question of the removal of the limit of the rate. I believe that the Minister is much more likely to get his Bill put on to the Statute Book and have it favourably accepted, and is much more likely to find the new authorities, the county councils and others, who will have to contribute membership to these new authorities, doing their utmost to make the Measure a success and carry out its proposals if a limitation is put in. I do not doubt for a moment that he is genuine in his belief that no limitation is necessary, but he has to consider the reception which this Bill has received outside and the fears which it arouses. As a friend of the Bill, I urge him in the interests of his own Measure to accept this or some other limiting Amendment.

8.0 p.m

Mr. W. R. SMITH: There is some misapprehension in the minds of hon. Members on this matter which is not altogether justified by the facts. One is entitled to say that this question of limitation would not have been inserted in the Bill in another place had the Bill gone to that place in the form in which it is now. It really was something in the nature of a protest, or a safeguard, so far as the rates are concerned, because there were no financial provisions in the Bill whereby a portion of the expenditure would be met by Government grants. Since the Bill has come back to the House my right hon. Friend in Committee inserted a finance clause—Clause 55—which makes provision for what I have every reason to believe will be very adequate grants so far as the catchment area is concerned. I submit that that alters the situation entirely from what it was when the Bill went to the other House.
My hon. and gallant Friend said that great fears exist. Is not that a point which is met by the statement which was once made to the effect that the greatest troubles of our lives are those that never reach us? Are not we fearing something that may never materialise? After all, who is going to constitute these catchment area authorities? They are to be composed of two-thirds delegates from the county councils and the borough councils. The House by this Amendment is asked to infer that these people, almost out of sheer mischief, will put forward schemes of heavy financial obligations and so put a heavy burden on the rates of their areas. I venture the opinion that the full experience of county councils, as such, is of a nature to warrant the assumption that they will be very careful of any expenditure which they incur; and, seeing that there is now a provision made for grants towards these works which the catchment area authorities will undertake, I venture to say that there is no justification for this Amendment.
There is a safeguard in the Bill to the effect that if a scheme goes beyond a certain figure as a total sum, or if it represents an expenditure beyond a certain figure as determined by the rates, there can be a public inquiry. There is in the Bill every possible safeguard which can be inserted to prevent anything in the
nature of schemes being embarked upon which are not really justified by the needs of drainage within the area itself. Further, this point was very elaborately dealt with in Committee, and there was a very long discussion upon it. The Committee then decided not to take up the Clause as inserted in the other House. I venture the opinion that it is hardly practicable for us to accept it now. I would emphasise the great change which there is in the Bill as it now stands, as compared to when it was first introduced. There is the definite assurance of Government grants, and there are the other safeguards which will arise out of the common sense procedure of our public administration.

Captain RONALD HENDERSON: I would ask the Minister to give further consideration to this Amendment before he rejects it. I endorse what has been already said. The fact remains that there is a grave misgiving throughout the whole country on the question of the expenditure which will be involved under this Bill. It is not a misgiving which is the outcome of wild statements; it is voiced by the County Councils' Association, who will be largely concerned in administering the Bill. There is another point with which all Members of the House will agree. It is common knowledge that agriculture to-day is passing through an extremely difficult time. No language can be strong enough to express the situation. If I may refer to one catchment area in order to illustrate the type of statements which are being made, and which are giving rise to these misgivings, I will refer to the Thames catchment area. Statements have been made there that it is possible under this Bill to incur an expenditure of £9,000,000, and that, if that expenditure is incurred, it will result in a rate which it is estimated will be in the neighbourhood of 4s. 8d. The right hon. Gentleman the Minister will know as well as I do that a rate of that kind placed on the land in the Thames catchment area will spell plain bankruptcy.
I am one of those who believe that there is a great measure of good in this Bill. I believe that through this Bill a lot of work can be accomplished which is badly wanted to be done; but we must do it gradually. The whole point, is:
Are we going to launch suddenly into a large number of big schemes, or are we going to carry out the matter carefully and gradually, and spread it over a number of years? If we do it gradually, we can do an immense amount of good under this Bill, and not exceed the halfpenny limit suggested. On the other hand, if very large schemes are launched upon, an immense amount of money will be involved which, I can say without exaggeration, will practically mean bankruptcy to an immense amount of the land in the catchment areas concerned.
In Clause 55 there is no pledge on the part of the Government that they will give any definite sum. I agree that it would be impossible for the Minister to pledge himself to any definite sum because of the widely varied requirements of the different catchment areas, but there is not even a promise of a proportion of the sum involved. There is nothing in the finance Clause by which the Minister permits himself to give a certain percentage of assistance in order to meet the requirements of the different catchment areas. There is not a definite promise of a penny under the finance Clause towards the relief of the county councils on any scheme involved. It is this indefiniteness which is one of the contributory causes of this strong feeling of misgiving to the effect that a blank cheque is going to be given to the catchment area board.
Taking the alternative suggestion which the Minister put up in Committee, to the effect that no scheme involving the expenditure of £50,000, or involving the possibility of a twopenny rate, may be embarked upon without, if necessary, a public inquiry being held, in my opinion that is a very valuable safeguard, but it hardly goes far enough—for this reason. Let us assume that a scheme proposed involves over £50,000 or, alternatively, a rate of more than 2d., and that there is a general fear on the part of the local authority, and that the Minister in his discretion orders a public inquiry. Suppose that public inquiry, after having been held, recommends that this scheme should not be proceeded with, or only a portion of it, there is still no safeguard to the local authority, because the Minister may, from totally different and other reasons
—for instance, the utilisation of a large number of unemployed—still order the scheme to go forward. I am now expressing the views which have been put forward by some of the county councils, who do not find in this alternative put up in Committee any definite or sufficient safeguard to protect their interests. I feel that a great deal of good could come out of this Bill, and I venture most earnestly to ask the Minister if he cannot see his way favourably to consider the question of a limitation of the rates.

Sir J. LAMB: My right hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Captain Henderson) said he believed that a good deal of good would be done by this Bill. I believe that is true, but, on the other hand, it is quite correct to say that one can receive benefits at too high a price. At a time When agriculture is in such a depressed condition, we have a great fear that whatever is done, even under the heading of assistance to agriculture, might be done at too high a price. This Amendment is an effort to limit expenditure in the interests of the communuity as a whole and of agriculture in particular. Not only to-day, but in Committee, the Minister has used the argument, when we have discussed the question of the limitation of a halfpenny, as to the amount which will be produced in the various areas by a halfpenny rate. He has said that in one area the amount will be very large, and that in another area it will be comparatively small. I cannot see the force of that argument, because to me a halfpenny rate is the same burden upon the individual no matter where that individual resides; consequently, the amount which a rate produces is not, to my mind, a useful or a reasonable argument to bring forward in this particular case.
Unfortunately, this Bill, through its passage upstairs, has been deprived of all reasonable safeguards recommended by the Royal Commission, and also put in in another place. I suppose I might be called to order if I were to discuss the question of an appeal tribunal, but I would refer to the fact that the appeal tribunal, as an effective organisation, has been cut out of this Bill, because the alternative procedure which has been placed in the Bill as against the tribunal which was in originally, and which I
hope we will be able to restore, is so expensive and so difficult that it becomes absolutely unavailable for the individual and for the corporations. Consequently, it is ineffective, and is no safeguard at all. Having been unfortunately deprived of all safeguards in the way of appeal, we are thrown back necessarily upon the course of trying in all ways we can to limit the expenditure. That is what we are trying to do in this case.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, when he was speaking, said that they were relying upon the Clause which had been put in dealing with a total expenditure of over £50,000 or a twopenny rate. To a certain extent that is some safeguard, but it certainly is not a safeguard sufficient to satisfy either the County Councils' Association or those in agriculture for whom I am speaking. He told us also that powers had been taken to give grants, and he used the word "adequate" grants. There is no statement in the Bill of what is considered to be adequate. If the Minister will put something in the Definition Clause indicating what the word "adequate" means, probably I shall be satisfied; but he has not done that, and I do not suppose that he intends to do so. There is nothing either to say what "adequate" means or to say what the proportion of the expenditure which is being made shall he. In other departments, there is a definite proportion put down as to what shall be given by the Government towards expenditure which has been sanctioned by the authorities. There should be in this Bill some guarantee that great burdens are not going to be placed on the locality without some adequate assistance being given from the Government.
The statement was made that the greatest troubles of our lives are those which never reach us. Our trouble is that these big grants, about which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade has been speaking, are never going to reach us. Consequently, we are thrown back upon the procedure of trying, whenever we possibly can—and we shall continue to do so throughout the whole of the process of this Bill, and I hope it will be done elsewhere as well—to limit the expenditure by saying, as we are doing here, that it shall be confined to a certain sum.

Mr. GUINNESS: The Minister of Agriculture would do well to try and meet the very genuine and real alarm which exists as to the financial results of the Bill as it stands. In my opinion a good deal of this alarm is unfounded. I do not think that the far-reaching and costly schemes which some people seem to expect will be undertaken, that is those people who take at their face value the speeches of hon. Members opposite. A good deal of the trouble is due to the expectations which have been aroused by the Minister himself of solving the unemployment problem by making a large contribution to its solution by means of schemes which will be brought into operation under this Bill. But that alarm, whether it is well founded or not, undoubtedly exists. You cannot speak to any member of a county council without appreciating how deeply they are concerned as to the possible burdens which will be thrown upon the ratepayers and at the lack of adequate control on the part of county councils. The only effective safeguard, so far as county councils are concerned, is not in the Bill, and the right hon. Gentleman would be wise to try and find a compromise.
As the Bill left another place it provided that local authorities who have to find the money would have very effective financial control. In my opinion that control might to some extent have hampered the operation of the Bill. The limit of a halfpenny rate, except where there is unanimity among the councils cencerned, might well in certain cases hold up the acceptance of schemes which are really necessary, and the Amendment is framed in a form which gets over that difficulty. It would be no longer possible for one recalcitrant county council out of seven or eight, and it may be a county council responsible for an area which is in no danger of flooding, to hold up work on such a scheme. There can be no reasonable objection to this Amendment, which leaves the control in the hands of a majority of the councils, and the right hon. Gentleman would be very wise to offer this to another place as a compromise. If he does not I am sure he will find that they will insist on the necessary financial guarantees in the interests of local authorities, and will probably find that they will be much more drastic than those proposed by the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: Hon. Members opposite know that I have taken a great deal of trouble to find a way which is administratively practicable in order to deal with the very genuine fear to which they have referred. I considered the matter for a very long time and finally we devised a scheme which is now incorporated in Clause 56. I still think that that is a much better way of dealing with the matter than the method proposed by the Amendment. In the first place a stereotyped figure is quite impracticable. It would be an absurdly low figure one area and altogether too high in another. The Amendment means that if one county council in an area withholds its consent a catchment board cannot move at all.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: The words of the Amendment are "without the consent of the majority of the councils."

Dr. ADDISON: I will withdraw that observation. At all events it is a majority of the county councils, but the point is that we are setting up a responsible body of experienced men, giving them work to do, and already we have limited them by all manner of inquiries and appeals. We have restricted their freedom of action very much already, and this Amendment would make it quite impossible for a board to work. I cannot accept it consistently with the general framework of the Bill. I have done my best to find a workable compromise and it is embodied in Clause 56. I am not responsible for what may be done in another place, but I am responsible for finding a scheme which will work and I prefer my own prescription in Clause 56 to the present Amendment.

Mr. BLINDELL: I desire to support the Clause as it stands. It seems to me that most of the arguments which have been put forward in support of the Amendment have been based on a wrong assumption. The Amendment, it is said, is designed to limit expenditure. This Clause does not deal with expenditure at all; it deals with the authority of a catchment board to issue a precept upon local authorities or upon an internal drainage board. In this matter I rely upon the constitution of the catchment board. The Amendment ensures that it shall not be more than a halfpenny rate That assurance is already in the Clause. Two-thirds of the members are direct
representatives of borough councils and county councils and only one-third are direct representatives of internal drainage boards. The question as to how much shall be levied upon county councils and borough councils can safely be left to the direct representatives of those councils.
I think the Clause is rather loose and that there is a danger that internal drainage boards may levy tremendous rates upon occupiers of land in order to meet the precepts which are levied upon them. So far as internal drainage boards are concerned they have the power to levy a direct rate for purely local drainage schemes and then they can levy an additional rate in order to meet the precept made upon them by the catchment board. To say that a catchment board shall not have the power to levy what may be a reasonable part of the expenditure on any scheme of drainage which will benefit all sections of the community is wrong. If this Amendment were accepted and put into the Bill, it would be of distinct disadvantage to the occupiers of the land, and it would put an undue financial pressure upon the internal drainage boards. I am glad to know that the Minister is not going to accept it, and I hope that he will stick to his own scheme. In that, I feel he is very wise.

Mr. WELLS: I am very sorry that the Minister has not accepted the Amendment. It concerns a point that affects my area very much. My county council have asked me to vote against this Bill if this Amendment is not put into it. I think there is a very good reason for their attitude. They have grave suspicions that they are going to be held up and made to pay large sums of money in the future. We know there is a scheme to cost £4,000,000, and we know that the Minister has overriding power over any appeal. A local inquiry may be held, and the Minister may decide what the result of that inquiry shall be. There is no adequate protection. You may be going to spend as much as £2,500,000 to £4,000,000 on outfall drainage works on one section of the river, but that will have nothing to do with money that may be spent on other parts of the river. All the time we are spending these vast sums of money, and additional sums for upkeep, a borough in another part of the river is doing its safeguarding work
against floods as it has done for many years past, and is spending thousands of pounds in doing it. All that expense is going on, and in addition, there is the expense put on by the Minister in the lower areas.
We have heard appeals in the House in regard to the real needs of Somerset. There is not a Member of this House who would oppose any Measure that the Minister brought forward to deal with the situation in Somerset at once. I do not believe that this work is really necessary. It was spoken of seven years ago when it was going to cost £1,250,000. In 1927, the figure had gone up £2,500,000. So it has grown, and it will grow the whole time. I do not believe that anybody has asked for that work to be done. We have the feeling in the uplands that this money will be spent on drainage work that is not really necessary, and that the cost will eventually be put upon the local authorities. That is one of the reasons why we take up our position in regard to this Amendment. If the Minister cannot accept a halfpenny, I wish he would accept some limit to the expenditure that can be put upon the county councils.

Viscount CRANBORNE: I wish to support the Amendment. I hope the Minister even at this late hour will see his way to accept it. It is a very mild and moderate proposal. If there is agreement between the catchment board and the county council, it does not come into operation at all. It only operates if there is disagreemnt, and it is only a limitation, even then. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, when he spoke against this Amendment, said that there was no danger in practice of a larger amount being required from the local authorities, because since the Bill has been altered, there has been an arrangement for grants to be made by the county council. If that is so, why should not the Government give the guarantee that is asked for in the Amendment? If the county councils are not to be required to pay any more, then by all means give the guarantee and put them out of their misery. He said we must trust to common sense in public administration. In my county districts we cannot trust to common sense in public administration. In the last ten years we have seen what we regard as a
great deal of extravagance. In the
district where I live an immense amount of money has been spent on roads that we consider was unnecessary. The other day there was the astonishing spectacle of all the inhabitants of the district writing to protest against the expenditure on the roads, while the Ministry was going on with the expenditure. We have seen too much of that. We want some definite guarantee. I would rather see this scheme of land drainage held up and take a longer time to carry through than that there should be any further Government extravagance.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: This Amendment raises once more the great question as between uplanders and lowlanders. Political differences are insignificant as compared with the differences that we shall find between them. I intend to support the Government. The Minister has now caused another great split in the Conservative party. The split will be seen very soon if the hon. Member presses his Amendment to a Division. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Henley (Captain Henderson) said, and said rightly, that agriculture cannot bear any further burden. It cannot. It is obvious that the present position of agriculture is shocking. If this Amendment were accepted, it would throw a fresh burden upon agriculture. There are three sources of money by which the expenses of the catchment board will be met. Money is supplied by the State, and we shall all try to get as much of it as possible. Secondly, what is not borne by the State will have to be borne either by the precept upon the county council or by the internal drainage boards. The money that is precepted for from the county council will be paid by the county council out of the general rate. Since agriculture is de-rated, the land will not bear any proportion of the precept made upon the county councils. Therefore, the sum paid by the county councils on their precept will not mean any demands from agriculture at all. It is the internal drainage board alone that will have to pay the additional sum. The only way in which the agriculturist will pay towards this Bill will be in his position as a payer to an internal drainage board.

Captain HENDERSON: May I point out that the internal drainage board will
have its own separate little bit to look after, and that these boards will be masters in their own house.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I think the hon. and gallant Member for Henley is under a misapprehension. The internal district boards will be responsible for their own functions within their own districts, but they will be precepted on by the catchment board. The internal districts will have to pay towards the expenses of the catchment boards. If the county council contribution is limited and the State contribution is limited, there will only be one contribution unlimited, namely, the contribution of the internal district board, and that is the only body to which the agriculturist is definitely paying.

Sir J. LAMB: He pays to the county council on another basis. He pays as a householder towards the county rate.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: We are talking about the burden on agriculture as an industry and not the burden on occupiers of houses. The farmer who occupies a house is in exactly the same position as the member of a town industry who occupies a house. I am concerned with the burden which this Bill is going to place on the industry of agriculture and the burden which it places on the agriculturist as an agriculturist is in the payment of the internal district rate. The agriculturist in the upland area does not pay to the county council qua agriculturist at all, but as a householder.

Sir J. LAMB: Does the hon. Member contend that the rates in those counties at the present time do not constitute a burden?

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: Agriculture being derated and the precept of the catchment board being upon the general rate of the county council, the agriculturist qua agriculturist will not be paying one penny in that way. He will be paying as a householder, like every other householder, but not as an agriculturist. On the other hand, the demand on the internal district board means that the agriculturist will pay upon the Schedule A assessment of his land, and in that case he will be paying as an agriculturist. It would be against the interests of British agriculture to put this limit on the county council contribution,
because it would leave agriculture with an unlimited liability. I would accept the Amendment freely if there was a concurrent limitation of the demand upon the internal drainage board, but, without such a limitation, it would be unsafe and unwise in the interests of agriculture to accept a limitation of the precept on the county council. For these reasons I propose to split the Conservative party, and I shall support the Government against this Amendment.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: It is rather unkind of my hon. Friend to try to set the uplands and the lowlands against one another. My hon. Friend belongs to the middle level, and I suppose he thinks that if he sets the uplands and the lowlands against one another, the middleman may come off best. I think he will be satisfied if the middle level is left alone. But he may find the uplands and the lowlands coming together. The uplands very often want to retain the water, while the lowlands do not want the water sent down to them, and therefore they may make common cause. Then they would not want the internal drainage board at all, and the hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson) would be left alone with his very efficient system of drainage. He must not represent to the House that there is any breath among us because we are a very united party. I admit that the Minister has made a genuine attempt to met our apprehensions in Clause 56, but that Clause leaves the matter eventually in the hands of the Minister, and, if I may say so, we do not quite trust the Minister at the present time. The right hon. Gentleman is most courteous and conciliatory, but under pressure of circumstances he may propose very large schemes of which we are rather afraid. There are words in this Amendment which we particularly value. They are:
shall not without the consent of the majority of the councils concerned.
If the Minister could see his way to insert these words or the sense of them in Clause 56 I think we might possibly see our way to withdraw the present Amendment. The Parliamentary Secretary to

the Board of Trade said that the county councils were in favour of this limitation of the rates but that was before the offer of Clause 56. The county councils have since seen that Clause. Reference has been made to the opinion of one county council. I have here a resolution passed by the Berkshire County Council on Saturday when the Clause was considered by them.
That it is the wish of this council that the Land Drainage Bill be opposed on Third Reading in the House of Commons unless the Lords' Amendments in regard to limitation of rates and the establishment of an appeal tribunal are restored to the Bill on the Report stage.
My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Henley (Captain Henderson) said that what the county councils are afraid of is the pushing forward of a very big schemes that will entail a heavy rate on the counties. That is a genuine fear. We have heard of a formidable scheme in the Ouse Valley, there is another big scheme in the Trent Basin and there is a very big scheme for the Thames Valley. The farmers of the Thames Valley, I can say with confidence, are very much alarmed at the possibility of such a large scheme. In the Thames Valley we have 12 tributaries of considerable size. It is true that the precept will not be paid by agricultural land, because that is derated, but supposing there is an internal drainage board set up for each of those 12 tributaries, there will be a drainage rate levied by each of those boards, and that will mean that a very large amount of agricultural land which does not now pay a rate will be called upon to pay. The farmers do not want that. This Amendment is generally supported by the counties and the farmers. If the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to insert in Clause 56 the provision that a majority of the councils should give their consent before the rate mentioned in the Clause could be levied, it would go a long way towards meeting the fears that have been expressed.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 101; Noes, 245.

Division No. 467.]
AYES.
[8.48 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel
Balniel, Lord
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Berry, Sir George
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.


Atholl, Duchess of
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Boyce, H. L.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Bird, Ernest Roy
Braithwaite, Major A. N.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Ramsbotham, H.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Hacking, Rt, Hon. Douglas H.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Hammersley, S. S.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Butler, R. A.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Haslam, Henry C.
Salmon, Major I.


Carver, Major W. H.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(0xf'd, Henley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Christle, J. A.
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hurd, Percy A.
Smithers, Waldron


Cranborne, Viscount
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Turton, Robert Hugh


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Everard, W. Lindsay
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Fermoy, Lord
Meller, R. J.
Wells, Sydney R.


Flelden, E. B.
Millar, J. D.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ford, Sir P. J.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Withers, Sir John James


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Womersley, W. J.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Muirhead, A. J.



Gower, Sir Robert
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Gray, Milner
Ormsby-Gore. Rt. Hon. William
Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir Victor Warrender.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Penny, Sir George



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cowan, D. M.
Isaacs, George


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dagger, George
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Dalton, Hugh
Johnston, Thomas


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)


Alpass, J. H.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Ammon, Charles George
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Jones. Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Arnott, John
Duncan, Charles
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Aske, Sir Robert
Ede, James Chuter
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Edge, Sir William
Kelly, W. T.


Ayles, Walter
Edmunds, J. E.
Kennedy, Thomas


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Elmley, Viscount
Kinley, J.


Barnes, Alfred John
England, Colonel A.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)


Barr, James
Foot, Isaac
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Batey, Joseph
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lathan, G.


Bellamy, Albert
Gibbins, Joseph
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Law, A. (Rosendale)


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Gill, T. H.
Lawrence, Susan


Benson, G.
Gillett, George M.
Leach, W.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Gossling, A. G.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Gould, F.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Birkett, W. Norman
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin.. Cent.)
Lees, J.


Blindell, James
Granville, E.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Coine)
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Bowen, J. W.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Logan, David Gilbert


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Longbottom, A. W.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Groves, Thomas E.
Longden, F.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.


Bromley, J.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lowth, Thomas


Brothers, M.
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lunn, William


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
MacDonald. Malcolm(Bassetlaw)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Hardie, George D.
McElwee, A.


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Harris, Percy A.
McEntee, V. L.


Buchanan, G.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)


Burgess, F. G.
Hastings, Dr. Somervill
McKinlay, A.


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Haycock, A. W.
MacLaren, Andrew


Caine, Derwent Hall-
Hayday, Arthur
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)


Cameron, A. G.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)


Cape, Thomas
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
McShane, John James


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
March, S.


Charleton, H. C.
Herriotts, J.
Marcus, M.


Chater, Daniel
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Markham, S. F.


Clarke, J. S.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Marley, J.


Cluse, W. S.
Hoffman, P. C.
Marshall, Fred


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hopkin, Daniel
Mathers, George


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Horrabin, J. F.
Matters, L. W.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Melville, Sir James


Compton, Joseph
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Messer, Fred


Cove, William G.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Middleton, G.




Mills, J. E.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Sullivan, J.


Milner, Major J.
Romeril, H. G.
Sutton, J. E.


Montague, Frederick
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Taylor R. A. (Lincoln)


Morley, Ralph
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Thurtle, Ernest


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Tinker, John Joseph


Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Sanders, W. S.
Tout, W. J.


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sawyer, G. F.
Townend, A. E.


Mort, D. L.
Scott, James
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Muff, G.
Scurr, John
Vaughan, D. J.


Muggeridge, H. T.
Sexton, James
Viant, S. P.


Murnin, Hugh
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Walkden, A. G.


Noel Baker, P. J.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Walker, J.


Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Wallhead, Richard C.


Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Sherwood, G. H.
Watkins, F. C.


Palin, John Henry
Shillaker, J. F.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Paling, Wilfrid
Shinwell, E.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Palmer, E. T.
Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)
Wellock, Wilfred


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Sinkinson, George
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Perry, S. F.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
West, F. R.


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Westwood, Joseph


Phillips, Dr. Marion
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Pole, Major D. G.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Potts, John S.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Williams Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Pybus, Percy John
Snell, Harry
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Snowden, Rt. Hon.
Philip Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Raynes, W. R.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Richards, R.
Sorensen, R.
Wise, E. F.


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
 Stamford, Thomas W.
 


Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.


Ritson, J.
Strauss, G. R.

Amendment made: In page 21, line 32, leave out "(4)," and insert instead thereof "(2)."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

CLAUSE 24.—(Rating powers of drainage boards other than Catchment Boards.)

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Mr. Turton.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Do I understand that my Amendments on Clause 23 are not selected?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I would have called them if they were selected.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: May I ask if they are in order or not?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I can only say that they are not selected.

Mr. TURTON: I beg to move, in page 23, to leave out lines 3 to 6.
The object of this Amendment is to cut out what I believe to be a change in the rating law. When this was raised upstairs, the right hon. Gentleman said that he would go into the matter, and if possible put it right. I hope that he will be able to accede to a request to cut out these words. It is advisable to refer to the next Sub-section to see the effect of the Amendment. It will mean that any owner of any unoccupied hereditament, even though it be derelict, will have to pay a drainage rate upon it, notwithstanding that at the present
moment rates are not collected even where there is any use attached to it or any beneficial enjoyment expected. There was a case decided some 20 years ago under which the holder of a living was held to be the owner of a burial ground because it was held that he would expect to get a beneficial enjoyment of part of that ground, notwithstanding that the burial ground was at that moment unoccupied. Under this Bill the parson would be liable to pay rates under this proviso, but if instead of taking the example of a burial ground, the Minister were to take the example of a mill that is closed and for sale, and which the owner is not expected to use, that mill at the present moment is not liable to rates. Under this proviso and the succeeding Sub-section it will be. There was an example some years ago of land that was for sale, and which never found an owner for 20 years. That land was not rated under the old rating law. If these words are kept in, such land would be rated. Whether hon. Members opposite think that that land should be rated or not, I submit that it would be a better plan that a change of that sort should be made by a rating Bill than by a Bill which is ostensibly a drainage Bill.
There is another point which I hope that the Minister will bear in mind. I have put it to him before. It is the question of seaside shops which the right
hon. Gentleman will probably have met at such places as Southend-on-Sea. If these shops are let to a tenant who occupies them only in the summer, for all other rates than these rates, the rating of these shops will be levied on the occupier for only six months of the year. Under this Bill, we shall have the anomalous position that for six months in the year the occupier will have to pay rates and for six months the owner will have to pay rates. It is a mistake to have a different rating law for drainage rates and another rating law for other rates. I would ask the Minister to delete this proviso, and if he has those sentiments which some hon. Members opposite have about the rating of unoccupied land, I suggest that he should reserve this power for the Land Valuation Bill which the Government are still thinking of bringing forward in the dim and misty future.

9.0 p.m.

Mr. CROOM-JOHNSON: I beg to second the Amendment.
There seems to be a question here which is worth consideration. If there is going to be a re-examination of the methods by which rates are levied upon property generally, we should have an opportunity of allowing future discussion to deal with all rates. It is a pity that we should have an Amendment to the law brought in by a side wind in this way.

Dr. ADDISON: I do not know whether the House fully appreciates what this Amendment would really do if it were adopted. In drainage districts where there is an internal drainage authority, drainage rates always have been levied upon land, either on the basis of acreage or of annual value. In this Bill it is on annual value. They have been levied on land, first, because the operation of a drainage order safeguards it from danger, and secondly, because it derives benefit from the drainage works. These two principles have been applied to the rating of land for a long time, and the Act of 1929, which de-rated agricultural land generally, did not de-rate it for this purpose. It left rates on land for drainage purposes exactly as before. In the internal drainage districts there are two kinds of rates on the land, occupiers' rate and owners' rate, and the law is—
and we are not altering it in that respect—that where the work to be paid for is a new work or an improvement, the, internal drainage rate is levied on the owner. Where the charge is in respect of current expenses, maintenance, and so forth, it is levied upon the occupier.
Take the case put by the hon. Member. There is a house which pays its share of the internal drainage rate, being, according to the hypothesis, in an internal drainage district. It will pay on a third of its annual value, being a hereditament other than agricultural land. The fact that it has this rate levied upon it presupposes either that it escapes danger as a result of the drainage work which has been undertaken or that a benefit is conferred upon it by that drainage work. If neither of those things be true, then the owner can go to the courts and claim exemption from the drainage rates. The occupier can shut up the house, but it will continue to escape danger or to receive benefit whether there is anybody living -in it or not. If there were no drainage scheme and the area were flooded, the House would not be liveable in when the occupier returned to it. That is a consideration which must be taken into account. We cannot pick and choose. For that reason I am sure that, on reflection, the hon. Member will see that it would be impossible for me to permit this discrimination.

Mr. TURTON: It is intended under this Clause to charge drainage rates on derelict tenements?

Dr. ADDISON: A hereditament in the internal drainage district would pay on a third of its annual value.
Amendment negatived.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 23, to leave out lines 10 to 12.
The lines referred to in this Amendment read:
and subject to the provisions of this section, every drainage rate shall be assessed at a uniform amount per pound throughout the area.
Sub-section (4), in which these lines occur, deals with an internal drainage board's mode of raising revenue. It provides that the drainage rate shall be at a uniform rate throughout the area. I would point out to the House that we have given powers to the drainage board
to levy differential rates, whereby certain land which benefits more than other land shall be rated more highly; and the Minister just now said that if any ratepayer can show that he is not either protected by the work of drainage or does not benefit from it he will not be rated. Both those exceptions seem to be in violation of the wording of this Clause. As the Clause stands there can be no differential rating, nor will people be in a position to say, "I do not benefit, and therefore I ought not to pay." If the rate is to be levied at a uniform rate throughout this area, there can be no distinction between different sorts of property. I do not see how these words can remain in the Bill if the interpretation which the right hon. Gentleman has put upon the powers of the drainage board is accurate. If people are entitled to complain to the Appeal Court that they ought not to be rated because they do not benefit, how can it be said that it is a uniform rate per pound throughout the whole area?
I ask the House to observe what rates can be levied, because this is the kernel of the Bill so far as the drainage boards arc concerned. There are 300 of these internal drainage boards. Some of them rate on acreage, but most of them rate both on acreage and on the ordinary rateable value of hereditaments. In this Clause, instead of an acreage basis of rating the rate is to be levied on the annual value of the hereditaments. Farm land escapes ordinary rates at the present time, and the annual value of the hereditament is to be its annual value for Schedule A purposes. This is the first time that Schedule A has been brought into a rating Act. It is a very good precedent, and one we hope to apply elsewhere. Not only does this system take the place of the old acreage rate, but, in addition, local authorities are given definite power to rate on the annual value of all hereditaments. For the first time they can put the rate on houses and on other property which does not benefit. [Interruption.] Well, I am not certain whether it does benefit or not, but I will come back to that point later. The right hon. Gentleman, to make it a little bit more popular, and as a result of a compromise between all the interests, has arranged that hereditaments which are not agricultural land are to be rated on one-
third of their annual value. I had put down an Amendment that it should be one-fifth, because obviously the less the houses pay the more will be collected on the annual value of the agricultural land which escapes rates.
The main point, as I read this Clause, is that the rate levied upon the annual value of agricultural land and the rate upon one-third of the rateable value of land and buildings both have to be uniform throughout the whole area. If they are uniform there cannot be differential rating, and yet the drainage board may levy preferential rates. This power to levy differential rates seems to be contradictory to the instructions in this Subsection (4) to levy all rates on a uniform basis throughout the area. Still more does it make it impossible for people to plead that as they do not get any benefit from a drainage scheme they are not liable to the drainage rates. I cannot reconcile that view with this Clause any more than I can reconcile Sub-section (6) with Sub-section (4). I move the omission of lines 10 to 12 in order that this matter may be cleared up.

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to second the Amendment.
Sub-section (4) provides that:
every drainage rate shall be assessed at a uniform amount per pound throughout the area—
That provision is entirely inconsistent with Subsection (6), which allows differential rates. Those two proposals are entirely inconsistent with what we have heard from the Minister of Agriculture, who has just told us that every hereditament is going to be rated according to the degree to which it is faced with danger or receives benefit. As far as I understand this proposal, if an hereditament does not come under either of those two conditions it may yet be rated. Let me point out the anomalies which may result where a uniform amount per £ is levied throughout the area. In the area which I represent, the rate per £ on the various hereditaments varies from 8s. to 8d. in the £. This is solely due to the fact that those who pay 8s. are in a much more dangerous position in regard to the waters, and they have had to erect very much more expensive works to keep out the sea water than those who only pay 8d. in the £. I think that
point is quite clear, and there is no dissatisfaction with that very great difference, because the people who have to pay the higher rate recognise that they are in a different position, and the value of the land and the rents receivable are taken into account as well as the amount of the rates and the position they occupy.
Now the Minister tells us that the drainage rates are going to be levied at a uniform amount throughout the area, and we want to know what that means. The present system which has worked well hitherto, is based on a clearly defined principle. In the particular area to which I refer, the only expense which is borne by a uniform rate is the small expense of the Commissioners and bodies of that kind. What happens is that when any particular area requires drainage, or requires to be preserved from the sea, the Commissioners themselves undertake the work. It may affect only parishes like those in Lincolnshire, where you get these small rates as a separate affair. The small area served has to bear a heavier rate than the surrounding neighbourhood. I want to know from the Minister why that definite principle is going to be changed. I gathered, during the Committee stage, that this particular principle was to be continued, but now it seems to be discontinued by this Clause. If the old system is not continued, we ought to know the principle upon which the rating is to be based. The statements which have been made are entirely at variance with other statements made at an earlier stage. I shall certainly support the Amendment to leave out these words, because there is no reason, in the general principle of this Bill, or in its application to any particular area, why the system should be altered, and an alteration like that which is now proposed is certain to inflict serious injustice.

Dr. ADDISON: If the hon. Member for Horncastle (Mr. Haslam) had read the Bill carefully, he would not have made the speech which he has just delivered. The words in line 10 are:
subject to the provisions of this section.
Therefore, there is no change of the law in this particular case. The position is as I have already explained, that a person is liable to pay only on one of
the two grounds which I have mentioned in a particular case. The internal drainage board may find that a particular area is especially dangerous, and in that case it can levy a high rate to fall upon the owners in that area. If an area is specially benefited, the board may levy a higher rate upon that particular area than upon the surrounding areas. Differential rates are provided for in Sub-section (6) of this Clause.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I understand that a person can still appeal against a rate if he does not get any benefit from the works carried out.

Dr. ADDISON: We do not alter the law, and the basis remains as it was before. If a person is subject to a charge on one or other of the grounds which I have explained, he can apply to
the Court. In a particular district there may be some advantages which benefit one part more than others, and in that one part there can be a uniform rate. The differential rates are defined under Sub-section (6). It is perfectly clear that these rates are
subject to the provision of this section.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I do not see any reason why the words I have proposed to omit should remain in the Bill.

Dr. ADDISON: If a particular patch is benefited more than others, surely the charge must be uniform in that patch?

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The Minister of Agriculture says the law remains as it is, and that a person has a right to go to the Appeal Court, and say, "I am not liable to the rate which has been levied upon me." Under this Clause you are putting a proposal into the Statute Law saying that the rate shall be uniform throughout the area. That certainly does away with any previously existing right of any individual who is not benefited by a scheme to go to the Courts and to secure exemption.

Dr. ADDISON indicated dissent.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The right hon. Gentleman says it does not, but nobody reading the Clause as it stands would read it in that way. There is nothing in the Bill which gives to the individual any legal right of exemption. Under Sub-section (7) a drainage board may
exempt people who occupy areas high above sea level. That is only certain areas. Under Clause 30, if any person who is the occupier or owner is aggrieved by a drainage rate, he may, subject to the provisions of the Section, appeal against it. That is all right, but could anybody gather, reading the Bill as it stands, that he had a right to appeal to the Court because he is not benefiting by the scheme? [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes !,"] Lawyers opposite may say "Yes," but we have no lawyers here. Having had large experience in making laws and none of administering them, I can only say that under the Bill as it stands, it seems to me that nobody has any more right to go to the Court and say the property is not benefiting from the scheme than he would if he did get benefit from it. If you leave the words out, the man still has his right under the existing law, but if you put them in, he has no right at all.

Dr. ADDISON: In this particular case the board would not be entitled to levy a rate if he went to the court and the court held that they could not levy a rate. In that case this would not apply.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Then why put these words in? What benefit do you get from them?

Dr. ADDISON: It is a special area. If you subdivide an area, you must see that the two parts of the area are treated the same.
Amendment negatived.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to move, in page 23, line 16, at the end, to insert the words:
(c) in the case of sea defence Sub-section (4) (a) and (b) will not apply.
The object of this Amendment is merely to find out how the Bill stands with reference to sea defence. I must mention again that the Bill deals very largely with sea defence, because the words "defence against water" include defence against sea water. Several parts of the country have different methods of levying sea defence rates. The whole of the Bill deals with drainage rates, and I want to know from the Government if the drainage rate is going to include set defence rates, or are the two rates going on separately,
and can the Government separate the two? It is quite posible, in certain areas, that they will have different methods of levying sea defence rates from those contained in the Bill, and are they going to be levied in exactly the same method as that which the Bill lays down for drainage rates? These questions were not examined upstairs, because we only found out comparatively recently the full implications of the Bill as far as sea defence is concerned.
There is another matter. In urban districts, sea defence of seaside towns may be borne by the urban authorities. This Bill has certain provisions whereby urban authorities get off a percentage of their values for the purpose of rating. What is going to be the effect of the sea defence rates in relation to paragraphs (a) and (b)? The point is put forward as to how authorities stand in regard to the security for loans raised for the purpose of sea defence. I would ask the Minister of Agriculture to pay special attention to that, because it is a new and an important point. Do the provisions of the Clause affect the security on the rates of money raised for sea defence? I shall be very glad if the Minister will answer that, because we have rates which have altered in value, whether they have decreased or not. Therefore, we want a re-assurance from the Government on this point.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I think that, in moving this Amendment, the hon. and gallant Gentleman has taken a step which would have the opposite effect from that which he anticipates. If he looks at Clause 81, he will see that drainage includes defence against water, and defence against water includes defence against sea water. Those definitions make the position clear
on the point he has raised. In these areas differentiation will take place and rates will have to be levied on the annual value. Therefore, the position of land in that particular area, subject to this form of drainage, would be worse as compared with other land to which these two paragraphs apply. I can only assume that the hon. and gallant Gentleman put the Amendment down under a
misapprehension, and I hope now that I have made the position clear he will not press it.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: What about the security for loans?

Dr. ADDISON: The security remains unaltered.

Mr. HASLAM: The reply of the Parliamentary Secretary seems to have put the case in a very extraordinary position. If these two paragraphs are left out, then are we to understand that every drainage rate shall be assessed at a uniform amount per £ throughout the country? If we leave out these two paragraphs, will that have the effect of making the sea defence rate uniform? I cannot see, after what the Minister has said with regard to the previous Amendment about this drainage rate being assessed at a uniform amount per £ throughout areas, any point in having the words in, if a differential system is to be maintained whether for drainage or sea defences. The fact that the Under-Secretary states that leaving out these words would make this uniform, seems to me a very strong argument. It shows that the whole Clause is drafted in a most unsatisfactory manner, and it will lead to very considerable confusion in administration in those areas where at present we have a simple and satisfactory method of levying the rates and doing drainage works. If it is going to be altered, and there is to be doubt as to the continuance of this differential system, and we are to have these words in and to be told that there may be this uniform system of rating, it seems to me there will be confusion and difficulty, which are bound to cause a great deal of injustice.
For my part, I cannot see that the districts concerned are going to get any benefit whatever from these provisions. The Minister has not told us of any single benefit that can be derived by these seacoast districts from having this system imposed upon them. The present system is to be upset and undermined, and a new administrative system is to be set up, which is certainly a very difficult one to understand, as I have been told by the clerks of these commissions—men who have been used to interpreting Acts of Parliament—who do not know under what
system they will have to levy rates. There will be a great deal of doubt in their minds when these commissions are turned into internal drainage boards. This Subsection as it stands will cause confusion, and is bound to work injustice.

Mr. GUINNESS: I think there is a good deal to be said for the differential rate in the case of agricultural hereditaments, because, clearly, the agriculturist will get greater benefit than the owner of other forms of property from the maintenance of the main channel; but that distinction does not seem to me to apply in the case of defences against invasion by the sea. There it is not a matter of enjoying benefit, but is a matter of being defended from a force which would sweep away all values created by human effort, and, therefore, although I am not prepared, in regard to defences on the main river channel, to press very strongly any Amendment to drop the discrimination in favour of the non-agricultural hereditament, I do think that, in the interests of justice, where it is a matter of defence against the sea, all property should bear an equal responsibility for the works. It is not reasonable to put the whole burden upon the small and relatively distressed class who hold the land. Those who are enjoying the advantage of these sea defence works, and who, under the protection of those works, have been able to build up rateable value, ought all to stand on the same footing. It would remove an injustice, and make the Bill more acceptable in the areas where invasion of the sea is threatened, if it were possible to discriminate between expenditure by these authorities on the main river channel and expenditure in the matter of sea defences. I quite recognise that there may be some administrative difficulty, but, if that difficulty could be got over, I am sure that there is really no case on the ground of justice for putting the whole burden of sea defence upon the agriculturist, and leaving out the far richer classes of the community, who enjoy, relatively, much greater financial advantage.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I think there is a great case on the ground of justice for the Bill as against this Amendment. If the Amendment is carried, there will be no rebate of two-thirds on the rateable value of house property; the object
of the Amendment is to rate agricultural land and house property on the same basis. Surely, the reason for making the differentiation is that a house is no more valuable because it is protected by a sea wall, but the land is more valuable because it is protected by a sea wall.

Major the Marquess of TITCHFIELD: The house would be washed away.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The house would not be built if there were no sea wall. The value of the house is what it costs to build; the value of the land depends upon whether it is protected from the sea or not. Therefore, we are perfectly justified in putting an increased burden upon the land, whose value is created by these works, instead of upon the house, whose value is created by the workmen who built it.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I have been hoping all the time that the Minister would take the question of defence against the sea out of the Bill altogether. It differs so much throughout the country. In the case of Lincolnshire, for example, it is a question of a small expense compared with Kent, where the cost of keeping up the sea wall is very high; and I agree that the agricultural land in Romney Marsh has increased in value considerably owing to the sea wall. Therefore, it is hardly fair, if this Bill passes, to ask other parts which will be within that catchment area to pay a rate for something from which they have received no value whatever. I sincerely believe that, as the question of defence against the sea is so visionary in this Bill, it would strengthen the Bill if it were taken out altogether, and, perhaps, included afterwards in the Coast Erosion Bill, which is now hung up. In my own particular "back yard," it is recognised that, where the level of the land is from five to eight feet below high water mark, if it were not for the sea wall the whole area would be submerged, and, therefore, the sea wall there is of far greater value than ordinary embankments against the sea in other parts of the country. Who is going to pay in that district the very high rate that must be imposed for the upkeep of that sea wall? It is not on all fours with most of the other coast defences around England, and I certainly think it would be far better if the question of defence against the sea were taken entirely out of the Bill.

Major BRAITHWAITE: I do not think that we have had any reply to the questions which were put by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage). We do not know now where we stand in regard to this sea defence rate. I would ask the Minister to answer a plain question. Is this sea defence rate to be included in the general drainage rate in the case of urban authorities? I think that the position needs to be put clearly in that regard, so that we may know exactly how far the Bill goes in connection with sea defence. In my constituency the cost of maintaining these sea walls is very considerable, and we want to know definitely who is going to pay in the future, and if this Bill is going, to introduce a new way of maintaining that defence. I shall be grateful if the Minister will be good enough to give me a reply on this point.

Dr. ADDISON: I am glad to give the hon. and gallant Member the information for which he asks. It does not, in fact, make any difference. It will be seen from Clause 81 that the word "drainage" includes defence against water, and it will also be seen that "defence against water" includes defence against sea water; that is to say, drainage includes defence against sea water.

Sir W. WAYLAND: That might be interpreted as sea water at the mouths of rivers.

Dr. ADDISON: I was explaining that sometimes sea water comes a long way up a river. At present, and for the purposes of the Bill, where there is an internal drainage board, they have as part of their concern defence against sea water just the same as against flood water. It makes little difference whether a house is flooded by fresh water or sea water. If it is flooded, the damage is done. The drainage rate would be levied as drainage rates are now levied. The principles are not altered by the Bill. I suggest that the reason the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Guinness) had at the back of his mind was that it would he administratively impossible to say what the defence was against. It might sometimes be flood in a river and sometimes high tide. To the ordinary person it is just as objectionable to be flooded out by
river water as by sea water. The Amendment would add to the complexities and would serve no useful purpose. Defence against sea water is obviously provided for in the Bill.

Mr. TURTON: I am not very satisfied with the right hon. Gentleman's explanation, and I am even more dissatisfied with the argument of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood), and I would not for a moment wish that argument to rest unexposed. He talked about protection for houses, but he is aware that the Minister intends to move at a later stage to cut out "hereditaments" and to put in "land," and in this case we can take the will for the deed. It will in future, in the case of agricultural land, be the full value, and in the case of other land one-third of the value. The whole point to me about the defence against sea water is that it is unjust that, if you have defence against sea water for protecting a path, a racecourse or a pleasure ground, it should be only one-third of the annual value while if you have it, as the Bill now stands, protecting an allotment, a cottage garden or agricultural land, it shall be rated at the full annual value. As long as that

remains, the Bill must be unjust, and the incidence of the rate must equally be unjust. I cannot conceive how the right hon. Gentleman can defend it.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I suggest that the Minister is suffering from a concession that he previously gave to my right hon. Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds. If it had not been for making that concession he might not have been troubled with this Amendment. If we had kept the rates on an acreage basis, the Amendment would not have been material. The hereditament would have paid so much per acre whether it was a house or a racecourse or whatever it was, and you would have had a much better equality of rating on that basis than you have on the annual value. I think the right hon. Gentleman is rather suffering from not have allowed us to make use of the permission given in a previous Bill to keep to the acreage basis, which in the fen areas we have been carrying on for four or five hundred years. I protest against that alteration of what has served us so well in the past.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 107; Noes, 250.

Division No. 468.]
AYES.
[9.52 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Ramsbotham, H.


Ainsworth, Lieut.-col. Charles
Ganzoni, Sir John
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch't'sy)


Ashley, Lt,-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Rodd. Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Atholl, Duchess of
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ruggles-Brise. Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Balniel, Lord
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Salmon, Major I.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Hammersley, S. S.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Hanbury, C.
Savery, S. S.


Boyce, H. L.
Haslam Henry C.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, C.)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Brown, Col, D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Smithers, Waldron


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H. C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Somerville. A. A.(Windsor)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hurd, Percy A.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Butler, R. A.
Iveagh, Countess of
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast South)


Carver, Major W. H.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Thomson, Sir F.



Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Christle, J. A.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Turton, Robert Hugh


Colfox, Major William Philip
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Wells, Sydney R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Meller, R. J.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut,-Colonel George


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.M.)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Withers, Sir John James


Everard, W. Lindsay
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Womersley, W. J.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Muirhead, A. J.



Fermoy, Lord
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fielden, E. B.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Sir George Penny and Major the


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Marquess of Titchfield.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hardie, George D.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Harris, Percy A.
Noel Baker, P. J.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Altchison, Rt. Hon. Cralgie M.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)


Alpass, J. H.
Haycock, A. W.
Palin, John Henry


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Paling, Wilfrid


Arnott, John
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Palmer, E. T.


Aske, Sir Robert
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Perry, S. F.


Ayles, Walter
Herriotts, J.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Phillips, Dr. Marion


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Barr, James
Hoffman, P. C.
Pole, Major D. G.


Batey, Joseph
Hopkin, Daniel
Potts, John S.


Bellamy, Albert
Horrabin, J. F.
Pybus, Percy John


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Rathbone, Eleanor


Benson, G.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Raynes, W. R.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Isaacs, George
Richards, R.


Birkett, W. Norman
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Blindell, James
Johnston, Thomas
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Bowen, J. W.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Ritson, J.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Lelf (Camborne)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Jowett, At. Hon. F. W.
Romeril, H. G.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Bromley, J.
Kelly, W. T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Brothers, M.
Kennedy, Thomas
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Kinley, J.
Sanders, W. S.


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Sawyer, G. F.


Brown, W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Scott, James


Buchanan, G.
Lathan, G.
Scurr, John


Burgess, F. G.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Sexton, James


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Law, A. (Rosendale) Shaw,
Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Lawrence, Susan
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Lawson, John James
Sherwood, G. H.


Cameron, A. G.
Leach, W.
Shield, George William


Cape, Thomas
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Shillaker, J. F.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Shinwell, E.


Charleton, H. C.
Lees. J.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Chater, Daniel
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Clarke, J. S.
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Sinkinson, George


Cluse, W. S.
Logan, David Gilbert
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Longbottom, A. W.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Longden, F.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Compton, Joseph
Lowth, Thomas
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Daggar, George
Lunn, William
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Snell, Harry


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
McElwee, A.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
McEntee, V. L.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Duncan, Charles
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Ede, James Chuter
McKinlay, A.
Strauss, G. R.


Edge, Sir William
MacLaren, Andrew
Sullivan, J.


Edmunds, J. E.
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Sutton, J. E.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
McShane, John James
Thurtle, Ernest


Elmley, Viscount
March, S.
Tinker, John Joseph


England, Colonel A.
Marcus, M.
Tout, W. J.


Foot, Isaac
Markham, S. F.
Townend, A. E.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Marley, J.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Marshall, Fred
Vaughan, D. J.


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Mathers, George
Viant, S. P.


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Matters, L. W.
Walkden, A. G.


Gibbins, Joseph
Maxton, James
Walker, J.


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Melville, Sir James
Watkins, F. C.


Gill, T. H.
Messer, Fred
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gillett, George M.
Middleton, G.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Gossling, A. G.
Millar, J. D.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gould, F.
Mills, J. E.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Milner, Major J
West, F. R.


Granville, E.
Montague, Frederick
Westwood, Joseph


Gray, Milner
Morley, Ralph
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Groves, Thomas E.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Mort, D. L.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Moses, J. J. H.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Muff, G.
Wise, E. F.


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Muggeridge, H. T.



Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & zetland)
Murnin, Hugh
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Hayes.

Mr. MacLAREN: On a point of Order. I want to ask your advice, Mr. Speaker. Would it be possible to ask the Minister to explain exactly what is meant by Sub-section (5) before we proceed to the next Amendment?

Mr. SPEAKER: Dr. Addison!

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 23, line 26, to leave out the words, "as such a railway."

This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 26.—(Operation and incidence of drainage rates.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 26, line 32, to leave out from the word "collection" to the end of the Clause.

Mr. TURTON: On a point of Order. These words, I understand, were, by Amendment, left out in Committee. Is it in order now to leave them out again?

Dr. ADDISON: It is to put right a printer's error.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 33.—(Election of members and proceedings of drainage boards.)

Colonel WEDGWOOD: On a point of Order. Are you not selecting Amendments on Clause 29, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. SPEAKER: No.

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to move, in page 31, line 24, after the word "objections," to insert the words "and the proper publications of such register."

Colonel WEDGWOOD: On a point of Order. Do I understand that you are not selecting the Amendments standing in my name, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. SPEAKER: No, I have not selected them.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether there will be an opportunity of discussing the composition of these new drainage boards?

Mr. SPEAKER: We have been discussing them for a long time.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: We have been discussing the question of the composition of the catchment boards, but the drainage boards are something quite different. The drainage boards are elected on a property basis.

Mr. SPEAKER: I fancy that there was a Committee stage on this Bill.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: That question was not raised on the Committee stage of the Bill.

Mr. HASLAM: My Amendment has the object of securing that these registers which are mentioned shall be open to inspection. I do not think there is any need for me to explain the proposal. It is, obviously, most important that all persons concerned shall be able to see who are the electors to a drainage board. Therefore, I propose that the registers shall be open to inspection, and I understand that the Minister agrees.

Sir D. NEWTON: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I agree to accept this Amendment. I undertook in the Committee stage to make provision for this.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: May I point out that the whole of this Amendment, and most of this Clause, would be entirely unnecessary if the drainage board were elected like any other elected body in this country, namely, by the people as a whole instead of by selected classes of well-to-do persons? All these complications about this register and its accuracy arise from the fact that you are giving one vote to the poor man and 10 votes to the rich man. Yet this new system of electing the members of a board, which is to spend the money of the ratepayers, is introduced by a Labour Government !

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 34.—(General powers of drainage boards.)

Amendments made: In page 32, line 6, leave out from the first word "or" to the end of the paragraph, and insert instead thereof the words "drainage work."

In line 12, leave out from the word "watercourse" to the second word "or" in line 14.

In line 16, leave out the words "or outfalls for water."

In line 17, leave out from the word "existing" to the end of the paragraph, and insert instead thereof the words "drainage work."—[Br. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 32, line 20, to leave out from the word "or" to the end of line 21, and to insert instead thereof the words "drainage work or."

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I desire to point out that all these alterations take away the words which were inserted for the purpose of safeguarding the watering of cattle and stock in the Lincolnshire drainage areas. I should like to ask the Minister whether he will insert those words in another part of the Bill. The Minister will remember the discussion and the promise he made. I take it that this matter is fully safeguarded.

Dr. ADDISON: I think it is safeguarded in the Bill.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I notice that the words dealing with the watering of cattle are absolutely eliminated, and I should like an assurance from the Minister that the matter is safeguarded.

Mr. HASLAM: The words "for the supply of water for cattle," are in Subsection (1, a), but it is a point of some substance and importance and I would like to be clear on the matter. I think the necessary words are in the Bill.

Dr. ADDISON: The words are omitted here, because if they were put in here they would be a repetition of what has gone before.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 32, line 24, leave out from the word "drainage" to the word "of" in line 25.

In line 27, leave out from the word "that" to the end of the Sub-section, and insert instead thereof the words:
a Catchment Board shall not, by virtue only of this sub-section, be taken to be authorised to do any work otherwise than in relation to the main river."—[Dr. Addison.]

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 32, line 43, after the word "person," to insert the words:
or to any property or stock belonging to that person.
I should like to know whether stock is also covered by this Clause.

Mr. WELLS: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: The words of the Amendment are not necessary. The Clause reads:
Where injury is sustained by any persons.
It is obvious that injury sustained by any person includes injury to stock.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 33, line 6, at the end, to insert the words:
(4) It is hereby declared that nothing in this section authorises any person to enter on the land of any person except for the purpose of maintaining existing works.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: May I ask whether this gives a right to enter on land of an adjoining owner or occupier?

Dr. ADDISON: They have the right to do that in any case, but only for this purpose.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAusE 35.—(Maintenance of drains.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 33, line 14, to leave out from the word "land" to the word "to," in line 15, and to insert instead thereof the words:
through which the watercourse or that part of the watercourse passes.
This is to define the duties of the person who is responsible for the control of the watercourse and to make the intention of the Bill clearer. The Amendments to this Clause are purely drafting.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 34, line 12, after the word "that," to insert the words:
the control of the watercourse or the part of the watercourse in question is vested in some other person or that.
This is in order to deal with the question of surplus water, and it is really only a drafting Amendment to make the Clause quite clear.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 34, line 12, after the word "is," to insert the word "otherwise."

In page 36, line 3, leave out Subsection (13).

In page 36, line 10, to leave out the words "sections nine and thirty-six," and insert instead thereof the words "the provisions."

In page 36, line 11 after the word "Act," insert the words "relating to the commutation of obligations."—[Dr. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 36, line 12, at the end, to insert the words:
(15) In this section the expression 'watercourse' does not include the main river of a catchment area.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I should like to put the point whether this is an entirely satisfactory Amendment. There are one or two catchment areas where there is only one watercourse, and that is the main channel. I am thinking of the River Anker. If the expression "watercourse" does not include the main river in a catchment area, there is very little else left of the Clause, and I should like to know whether there are any other provisions in the Bill which deal with small catchment areas with one river.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. and gallant Member will recall that in Committee we debated this subject, and by the adoption of the word "watercourse" we opened the door rather wider than was intended, and, therefore, we have to limit the expression "watercourse" and define it in this way in this Clause. It is quite in order now and does not give rise to any ambiguity.

Lieut. - Colonel RUGGLES - BRISE: Can the Minister of Agriculture give me an explanation on this point? In Clause 5 the main river is described as
that part of the channel of the river which is to be treated as the main river for the purposes of this part of this Act.
Does the main river, for the purposes of this part of this Act, mean that the same definition will apply to watercourses in Clause 35, which is the one about which there is considerable anxiety? If it does, then I think the right hon. Gentleman has gone very far to meet the point which I raised in Committee on this matter. I am not quite clear whether we are to take the extended definition of "main river" in this Amendment to be the same as that in
Clause 5. I shall be very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman if he will give me a definite assurance on that point.

Dr. ADDISON: This does apply to Clause 35. Main river is there defined as a stream over which the catchment board has responsibility. I think it is made quite clear that the term "watercourse" cannot possibly include a main river.

Lieut. - Colonel RUGGLES - BRISE: Might I ask for a reply to the other point? In Clause 5 it says:
main river for the purposes of this Part of this Act
Clause 5 is in Part II of the Bill and Clause 35 is in Part V.

Dr. ADDISON: Will the hon. and gallant Member tell me which part of the Bill he is referring to?

Lieut. - Colonel RUGGLES - BRISE: Clause 5, Sub-section (1). There it says that the channel of the river shall be
treated as the main river for the purposes of this Part of this Act.
That limits the definition to Part II. But the Clause about which I am anxious is Clause 35. If the definition in Clause 5 is confined to Part II, then "watercourse" will not have the same wide definition in Part V.

Dr. ADDISON: I see the point which the hon. and gallant has raised. I am advised that it is fully covered, but I will look into it again.

Sir DENNIS HERBERT: This may seem a small point, but it is one of some importance. The Minister says he will see that it is put right in another place. I understand that the Bill has passed through another place. They will have no power to interfere with it or to accept any Amendment put forward in this House. I do not see how the Minister can put it right there.

Dr. ADDISON: The other place can amend our Amendments.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 36.—(Enforcement of obligations to repair watercourses, bridges, etc.)

Amendments made:

In page 36, line 18, leave out the words "repair," and insert instead thereof the words "do any work in relation to."

In line 19, leave out the words "other outfall or defence against water," and insert instead thereof the words:
drainage works (whether by way of repair, maintenance or otherwise).

In line 20, leave out the words "keep it in good and proper repair," and insert instead thereof the words "do the work."

In line 22, leave out "outfall or defence," and insert instead thereof the word "or drainage work."

In line 23, leave out the word "repair," and insert instead thereof the words "do the work."

In line 24, leave out the words "put it in good and proper repair," and insert instead thereof the words "do the necessary work."—[Dr. Addison.]

CLAUSE 47.—(By-laws.)

Amendments made: In page 44, line 29, after the word "the," insert the word "drainage."

In line 29, leave out from the word "system" to the first "in" in line 30.

In line 35, leave out the word "channels" and insert instead thereof the word "watercourses."—[Dr. Addison.]

Consequential Amendments made.

Further Amendments: In line 11, leave out the words "and remove."—[Dr. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 45, line 12, to leave out the word "therein" and to insert instead thereof the words" in the watercourse, and when cut to remove them therefrom."

Sir BASIL PETO: Why should the perfectly clear wording of this Clause as it stands be altered by the omission of the word "therein" and the substitution of the proposed words? The Clause as drafted is much simpler, is better English and is preferable in every way to the Amendment. While asking for an explanation on that point I think we are also entitled to ask why we should have to deal at this stage with so many Government Amendments. We have now passed some three pages of Government Amendments. You, Mr. Speaker, just now reminded the House that there had been a Committee stage of this Bill. I do not know why, then, it should be
necessary for us, late in the evening, to have to go through page after page of Government Amendments at great pains to yourself, Mr. Speaker, and certainly without any amusement to the House. In a Bill of this kind surely all these Amendments ought to have been considered long before the Report stage.

Dr. ADDISON: I think we have fewer Government Amendments on this Bill than I have known on many other Bills So far as this particular Amendment is concerned, I think the hon. Baronet is entitled to say that we ought to have thought of it before. I plead guilty to that, but I am advised that the words in the Bill might mean that a man might have cut the vegetable growths but not have pulled them out. We want to make sure that when persons have cut these growths they shall not leave them in the ditch.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I beg to move, in page 45, line 12, at the end, to insert the words "or accumulations of mud."

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to second the Amendment.

Sir B. PETO: After the Amendment last inserted, I suggest that the Amendment of the hon. Member ought to be "or accumulations of mud therefrom," "or accumulations of mud therein therefrom."

Mr. GUINNESS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the word "mud" will include "sand."

Dr. ADDISON: I do not think that the Amendment would be quite fair. It might mean that a man would be called upon to remove mud that had been brought down from somewhere else. I cannot say whether the word "mud" would include sand, but I should think it would. While it would not be fair to call upon a man to remove mud which had been brought down from elsewhere. it is fair to Insist that any growth that may have been cut shall be removed from the watercourses.

Amendment negatived.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 34, line 20, at the end, to insert the words:
and in the case of a bye-law made by an internal drainage board has also been given
to the council of every county, county borough, or county district whose area, or any part of whose area is situate in the drainage district.
This Amendment is to ensure that the by-laws shall be made available to the councils of every county, county borough or county district whose area is situate in a drainage district. I undertook in Committee to bring forward this Amendment.

Mr. WELLS: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the Amendment.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I do not know whether the Minister realises that he is putting a great burden on a large number of small internal drainage districts by compelling them to write out these bylaws and to send them to the county councils and catchment boards. I have no recollection of that undertaking being given in Committee. He is placing a great burden on the clerks of internal drainage boards, and as I constantly have to act in the capacity of a very inefficient clerk to a drainage district, I do not appreciate this extra burden being placed upon my inefficient shoulders.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. Gentleman is under a misunderstanding. All that is required is that he should put a copy in an envelope with a halfpenny stamp on it, and send it to the clerk of the council of the county borough or county district in which the drainage district is situated. I am quite sure that he could do that without much trouble.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 50.—(Powers of county councils and county borough councils.)

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I beg to move in page 47, line 41, to leave out the word "thirty-five", and insert instead thereof the word "thirty-six."
I am happy to say that once more I am in a position of moving an Amendment which I understand that the Minister is going to accept. I know that he will give me his thanks for having been able to point out something in the Bill that requires an improvement. As far as I understand, Clause 36 is intended instead of Clause 35.

Dr. VERNON DAVIES: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. TURTON: I hope that the Minister will not accept this Amendment, because it will make the procedure under Clause 35 much more involved if you cannot do it by the county council. It will mean the formation of numerous small internal drainage boards at great expense, causing great complexity for the Minister's own officials. If this could be done by the county councils, who are willing to assume the burden in all cases, it would be much simpler for all parties.

Dr. ADDISON: The reason for the Amendment is that the Clauses have been renumbered.

Amendment agreed to.

The following Amendment stood upon the Order Paper in the name of Dr. ADDISON:

In page 47, line 42, to leave out the words "forty-two," and to insert instead thereof the word "forty-three."

Dr. ADDISON: I do not move this Amendment.

Viscount WOLMER: On a point of Order. The Minister told us that the Clauses had been renumbered.

Dr. ADDISON: "Forty-two" should be "forty-four." It is my mistake, and the hon. Member for Leominster (Sir E. Shepperson), who is moving to substitute "forty-four" for "forty-two," is right.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I beg to move, in page 47, line 42, to leave out the word "forty-two" and to insert instead thereof the word "forty-four."
I think the honour again falls to me to move the Amendment in the form in which it should be moved. As I have discovered what was the real intention of the Minister, I hope that at a future time he will appreciate that it has been my desire to give him assistance.

Sir B. PETO: I beg to second the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 48, line 5, leave out the word "thirty-four" and insert instead thereof the word "thirtyfive."—[Sir E. Shepperson.]

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: I beg to move, in page 48, line 15, to leave out the word "forty," and to insert instead thereof the word "forty-one."
I respectfully submit to the House that this is another instance in which I have been pretty observant. The alteration may not appear to be a very important one, but I submit that it is an essential one, and I think the Minister will accept it as an improvement.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 56.—(Provisions as to large schemes of catchment boards.)

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: I beg to move, in page 52, line 31, to leave out the word "twopence," and to insert instead thereof the words "one penny."
The principle of this Amendment has been to some extent discussed on Clause 22. This Clause gives us some safeguards, but they do not go nearly far enough. In a large area, such as the Trent catchment area, a twopenny rate produces £176,000, and that would be covered by the first safeguard as to a scheme which costs more than £50,000 requiring the consent of the Minister. The reduction from twopence to a penny is meant to safeguard the smaller districts. At a previous stage of this discussion the Minister read out a list of small areas in which a penny rate produces very small sums, but surely that proves, as distinct from what he wished to prove, that these small areas should get larger Exchequer grants. It is with the object of safeguarding smaller areas that I am moving this Amendment.

Sir J. LAMB: I beg to second the Amendment.
I do not wish to repeat the arguments put forward on this and similar Amendments, but I submit that here is another opportunity for the Minister to do something to strengthen this particular Clause if he wishes to do so.

Dr. ADDISON: We have discussed already what would be the equivalent of a rate of twopence in some areas as compared with an expenditure of £50,000, and the present figure was selected as giving a fair check over expenditure by internal drainage districts where an inquiry might be called for with the object of checking extravagance. I think
this Amendment would interfere with the execution of quite trivial works which an authority ought to be trusted to decide if it is to be entrusted with any duties at all. I have gone as far as I can be expected to go, and I cannot accept this Amendment.

Brigadier-General BROWN: I would like to ask the Minister if it is quite clear that this Clause means only schemes of over £50,000. The limit of the rate is to be twopence.

Dr. ADDISON: May I point out to the hon. and gallant Member that a scheme would be equally eligible for Government grant whether it cost £50,000 of £5,000? It depends entirely upon what is the scheme. If the scheme costs more than the amount fixed by the Clause it cannot be sanctioned without a public inquiry.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I do not think that the protection afforded by this Clause is sufficient. There is no guarantee that the Minister will act in accordance with the findings of the inquiry. The effect of an inquiry might be to force the expenditure up to a twopenny rate. Under the Clause as it now stands, the advice of the inquiry might be ignored, and that would force the expenditure up to a twopenny rate. If the amount is reduced from twopence to one penny, we shall get a little more protection than we have under the Bill.

Mr. DIXEY: The point which has been raised is a very important one, and I hope we shall have a reply from the Minister.

Mr. W. R. SMITH: This subject was debated very fully during the Committee stage. During that discussion Members asked for more protection in regard to schemes which might be very costly, and the Minister of Agriculture agreed to authorise, first of all, the limitation of a sum of money—£50,000. If the scheme exceeds that amount there is to be an inquiry, and there is the further protection that if it exceeds a twopenny rate there will be a public inquiry. I think that is a very reasonable protection, and in these circumstances it is not possible to accept the Amendment before the House. I think the protection is quite adequate under the Bill as it now stands.

Mr. WELLS: Some of the schemes to be carried out may cost more than a twopenny rate. In some districts in my constituency a penny rate produces only £6,000, and it is quite possible that some of the schemes will require more than a twopenny rate.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: If these words are put in, we consider that the

Clause will give a far better safeguard both to the ratepayer and to the man who is going to benefit. I think that in a short time when the country comes to deal with the Bill, it will be of the same opinion as we are.

Question put, "That the word 'twopence' stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 241; Noes, 120.

Division No. 469.]
AYES.
[10.52 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Glassey, A. E.
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Gossling, A. G.
McKinlay, A.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Gould, F.
 MacLaren, Andrew


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Cralgie M.
Graham, Rt. Hon.Wm. (Edin.,Cent.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Granville, E.
McShane, John James


Alpass, J. H.
Gray, Milner
Mander, Geoffrey le M.


Ammon, Charles George
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Mansfield, W.


Arnott, John
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
March, S.


Aske, Sir Robert
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Marcus, M.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Groves, Thomas E.
Markham, S. F.


Ayles Walter
Grundy, Thomas W.
Marley, J.


Baker John (Wolverhampton, Bllston)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Marshall, Fred


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Mathers, George


Barnes Alfred John
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Matters, L. W.


Barr, James
Hardie, George D.
Maxton, James


Batey, Joseph
Harris, Percy A.
Melville, Sir James


Bellamy, Albert
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Messer, Fred


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Middleton, G.



Haycock, A. W.
Mills, J. E.


Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)
Hayday, Arthur
Milner, Major J.


Benson, G.
Hayes, John Henry
Morley, Ralph


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)


Birkett, W. Norman
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Herriotts, J.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)


Bowen, J. W.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Mort, D. L.


Broad Francis Alfred
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Moses. J. J. H.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Hoffman, P. C.
Muff, G.


Bromley, J.
Hopkin, Dainel
Muggeridge, H. T.


Brothers, M.
Horrabin, J. F.
Murnin, Hugh


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Naylor, T. E.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Noel Baker, P. J.


Buchanan, G.
Isaacs, George
Oliver, George Harold (likeston)


Burgess, F. G.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Johnston, Thomas
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)
Palin, John Henry


Caine, Derwent Hall.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Paling, Wilfrid


Cameron, A. G.
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Palmer, E. T.


Cape, Thomas
Kelly, W. T.
Perry, S. F.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Kennedy, Thomas
Pethick-Lawrence. F. W.


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Clarke, J. S.
Kinley, J.
Pole, Major D. G.


Cluse, W. S.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Potts, John S.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Lathan, G.
Pybus, Percy John


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Rathbone, Eleanor


Compton, Joseph
Lawrence, Susan
Raynes, W. R.


Cove, William G.
Lawrle, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Richards, R.


Daggar, George
Lawson, John James
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Dalton, Hugh
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Leach, W.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Ritson, J.


Duncan, Charles
Lee, Jennie (Larnark, Northern)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Ede, James Chuter
Lees. J.
Romeril, H. G.


Edge, Sir William
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Edmunds, J. E.
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Rowson, Guy


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Logan, David Gilbert
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Eimley, Viscount
Longbottam, A. W.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Foot, Isaac
Longden, F.
Sanders, W. S.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Sawyer, G. F.


George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Lowth, Thomas
Sexton, James


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Lunn, William
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Shephered, Arthur Lewis


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Sherwood, G. H.


Gill, T. H.
McElwee, A.
Shield, George William


Gillett, George M
McEntee, V. L.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Shillaker, J. F.
Sutton, J. E.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
West, F. R.


Sinkinson, George
Thurtle, Ernest
Westwood, Joseph


Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Tinker, John Joseph
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Tout, W. J.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)
Townend, A. E.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Vaughan, D. J.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Snell, Harry
Viant, S. P.
Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)


Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Walkden, A. G.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Walker, J.
Wise, E. F.


Stamford, Thomas W.
Wallace, H. W.



Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Watkins, F. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Strauss, G. R.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


Sullivan, J.
Wellock, Wilfred



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fielden, E. B.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Atholl, Duchess of
Ganzonl, Sir John
Ramsbotham, H.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Balniel, Lord
Gibson, C. G. (Punsey & Otley)
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Blindell, James
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Salmon, Major I.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Boyce, H. L.
Hammersley, S. S.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Hanbury, C.
Savery, S. S.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Haslam, Henry C.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Butler, R. A.
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Smithers, Waldron


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hurd, Percy A.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Carver, Major W. H.
Iveagh, Countess of
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Southby, Commander A, R. J.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
King, Commodore At. Hon. Henry D.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Knox, Sir Alfred
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Christie, J. A.
Lamb, Sir J. O.
Thomson, Sir F.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Tinne, J. A.


Colville, Major D. J.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Turton, Robert Hugh


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Wells, Sydney R.


Dixey, A. C.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Meller, R. J.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Millar, J. D.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


England, Colonel A.
Mond, Hon. Henry
Womersley, W. J.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.



Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Fermoy, Lord
Muirhead, A. J.
Major Sir George-Hennessy and Sir George Penny.

CLAUSE 61.—(Protection of Water- works.)

Mr. WELLS: I beg to move, in page 56, line 19, at the end, to insert the words:
(f) execute any works or operation which would cause or be likely to cause flooding in any borough or otherwise interfere with the due flow of the water in any river in such borough.
This is of very great importance to those cities, boroughs and towns on the banks of rivers which have already in-cured expense in executing works for the prevention of flooding. I raised the matter in Committee and the Minister expressed doubt about it and promised
to look into it and see what could be done. It is a matter of vital importance that no works should be carried out which would cause flooding in the area of towns. Very great expense has been incurred in constructing and maintaining works to prevent flooding and it would be disastrous if, owing to the Bill, they should be subject to flooding in future.

Sir D. NEWTON: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I could not possibly accept the Amendment. When an authority proposes to execute any works, there is a public inquiry, apart entirely from the fact that representatives of the
town or borough concerned will most likely be on the catchment area board and all the matters will be gone into. In the case of the Thames we have provided for a considerable period to elapse. You cannot guarantee a town against an act of God and it would not be reasonable to expect a catchment area board to do so. Otherwise all reasonable considerations are taken account of. The Amendment seeks to achieve the impossible and I cannot accept it.

Amendment negatived.

Amendment made: In page 56, line 35, leave out the second word "of," and insert instead thereof the words" and with respect to."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

Mr. W. R. SMITH: I beg to move, in page 56, line 40, to leave out the words "proprietors of," and to insert instead thereof the words "persons carrying on."

Sir B. PETO: I should like to thank the Minister for accepting the Amendment. It is very necessary.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 63.—(Power of canal companies, etc., to divert sewers.)

Amendments made: In page 57, line 8, to leave out the word "authority," and insert instead thereof the word "board."

In line 21, leave out the words "authority and any other authority," and insert instead thereof the words, "board and any such authority as aforesaid."

In line 23, leave out the words "such other," and insert instead thereof the word "the."

In line 29, leave out the words "after notice thereof to the other."

CLAUSE 67.—(Compensation to existing officers.)

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 58, line 32, to leave out the word "officer," and to insert instead thereof the word "employee."
This is the compensation Clause and I think that it is desirable that we should compensate not merely the "boss" but also the clerks in cases where the small drainage boards are abolished If people are not taken on elsewhere they
should be compensated. We all know that the officers, if they are compensated, can very easily get a job elsewhere, but at the present time the position of the clerk is absolutely hopeless. This is confined to those who have been two years constantly in the service of the board, and I think that we ought to extend it to employés, who suffer far more from the loss of their jobs than officers.

Mr. MILLS: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I previously stated that if the word "employee" was not included in the term "officer," then I would make the necessary insertion. This provision applies to employés or others who have been two years in the service of the authority. We find that the word "officer" includes the regularly employed person. It includes employé and I can give my right hon. and gallant Friend that assurance.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

CLAUSE 77.—(Application of Act to Crown.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 63, line 33, to leave out the word "either."
This Amendment and the other Amendments to this Clause standing in my name are drafting Amendments, until we come to the Amendment in page 64, line 10, which puts paragraph (b) into better phraseology. The Amendment does not make any alteration in substance but puts the matter in better form.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 63, line 33, after the word "Lands," insert the words "the Commissioners of Works."

In page 63, line 35, leave out the words "or of" and insert instead thereof, the words:
of Crown Lands, the Commissioners of Works, or.

In page 64, line 10, leave out from the word "authorise" to the word "or" in line 28, and insert instead therof the words:
any person to do any work on, over, or under, or to use for any purpose any tidal
lands or any lands belonging to His Majesty in right of the Crown, the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall, or any Government Department, except—
(i) with the consent of the owner of the land; and
(ii) in the case of tidal lands, with the consent also of the Board of Trade; and
(iii) in any case otherwise than in accordance with the approved plans and sections and subject to the prescribed restrictions and conditions;
so, however, that nothing in this paragraph shall apply to work done in maintaining existing works on tidal lands, or land not in the occupation of His Majesty, the Duke of Cornwall, or a Government Department.

In line 33, leave out from the word "Trade" to the word "as" in line 35, and insert instead thereof the words "or the owner of the lands."

In line 36, leave out the word "works," and insert instead thereof the word "work."—[Dr. Addison.]

CLAUSE 79.—(Provisions as to drainage board of Thames Catchment Area and Conservators of River Thames.)

Amendment made: In page 67, line 10, leave out the words "section thirty-three of."—[Dr. Addison.]

CLAUSE 81.—(Interpretation.)

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to move in page 69, line 11, after the word "channel" to insert the words "or sea front."

I understand the Minister is prepared to accept this Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I think it is an improvement, and I accept the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 69, line 18, after the word "Drainage," insert the words:
(except when used in relation to any enactment).

In line 18, after the word "water," insert the words:
irrigation, warping, and the supply of water.

In line 28, after the word "area," insert the words:
or in the case of a drainage district situate partly within and partly without a catchment area, so much thereof as is situate within the catchment area.

In line 30, leave out the words "an internal," and insert instead thereof the word "a."

In line 30, at the end, insert the words: "situate wholly or partly within a catchment area."

Orders of the Day — FIRST SCHEDULE.—(Catchment Areas and Boards.)

Sir PHILIP SASSOON: I beg to move, in page 72, line 17, column 2, to leave out the words "Romney Denge Marsh Main Drains."
The object of this Amendment is to exclude the Romney Marsh Level from the list of catchment areas in the First Schedue and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will accept it. I am appealing to him on behalf of a body which has, not only by its great historical associations but also by the great success which has attended their work for some many centuries, a strong claim for special treatment by the House of Commons and to special treatment in this Bill. Since the earliest times of which we have a record the Romney Marsh Level has been considered a district apart. Neunius, in his Historia Britonum, wrote:
the first marvel of Britain is the Lumonry Marsh, for in it are sixty islands with men living on them. It is girt by sixty rocks and in every rock is an eagle's nest, and sixty rivers flow into it, and yet there goes into the sea but one river which is called the Limen.
This old historian, being a Welshman, may not have been very accurate in his account because it is difficult to find these rocks and still more difficult to find the eagles or the 60 rivers which he described, there is no doubt that his sixty marshes have been made into a level of uncommon fertility which provides pasturage for a famous breed of sheep, and the 60 rivers now discharge their waters through well constructed sluices. So complete and so efficient is this system of drainage that in the course of the last generation there have only been three severe droughts in the Romney Marsh during which time it has been difficult to provide water for the cattle and sheep upon it.
The beginnings of this remarkable system of drainage which has made Romney Marsh what it is to-day go back into the mists of time. The great Rhee wall may have been built by the Romans or by some earlier peoples. Certainly the Romans had a hand in building the sea wall. In 1252 the sea defences which had been badly breached by a series of violent storms, were entrusted to the existing authority and were given a
charter by Henry III. That corporation rapidly became a model for all existing drainage authorities of that day, and I should like to point out to the Minister of Agriculture that ever since 1252 the same authority has dealt with the drainage system of the Romney Marsh, and has done it by raising its own money by means of Scots levied on the inhabi-has been said by another early authority that there are five quarters of the world, America, Europe, Asia, Africa and the Romney Marsh. Why run counter to the decrees of nature, why break up the continuity of 1,000 years or more? Why replace an river. The Limen has long ceased to system. It is a purely military defence. It was built to keep out Napoleon, not to drain the Marsh.
There is a good precedent for what I am asking in this Amendment. This very area was excluded from the Sewers Bill in 1833, and all subsequent Acts have recognised that this particular area was distinct from any other. It has been said that there are five quarters of the world, America, Europe, Asia, Africa and the Romney Marsh. Why run counter to the traditions of the past, why break up the continuity of 1,000 years or more? Why replace an organisation which for centuries has discharged its work so efficiently and so cheaply? The Romney Marsh is not a catchment area at all in the sense of this Bill. It is a purely individual area. There is no main drain; there is no main river. The Lymne has long ceased to have any existence of its own, and the Hythe Canal is not part of the drainage system. It was a purely military defence. It was built to keep out Napoleon, not to drain the Marsh.
The level drainage of to-day is a network of large and small drains which empty, through a series of up-to-date sluices, the surplus water of 24,000 acres. The whole of the water is below high-water mark. Members of the House know that meetings of protest have been held by all the local authorities affected by the Bill, and all the authorities are strongly opposed to it. Where all are so satisfied with the work that has been done, why should the Minister seek to destroy this satisfaction It will do no damage to exclude the Romney Marsh level. On the contrary, to do so will
give intense local satisfaction. It will avoid a great many injustices of all kinds, and will preserve the finest drainage system of the country. It will preserve also the continuity of 700 years. I hope the Minister will see his way to exclude Romney Marsh level from this list of catchment areas.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I beg to support the Amendment. The Romney Marsh level should make a special claim upon the Minister and upon the House. We have heard from the right hon. Member for Folkestone (Sir P. Sassoon) its ancient history. It is governed by one of the undemocratic bodies of the world, and, like all very undemocratic bodies, it is governed much more efficiently than if it were governed by a democratic body. The peculiar claim which the right hon. Member for Folkestone has mentioned is that is is practically a body and a land unto itself. It has a very strong sea wall which has cost a considerable amount of money. Another claim it makes is that it wants to be left alone. It is quite willing to go on paying for the upkeep of the very expensive and very strong sea wall, four miles long, and also the cost of drainage of that land, which is practically surrounded by hills. It does not want to come upon the Minister or the country for a penny. I think the least the Minister can do is to leave it alone and let it go on in the same way as it has done, not for a thousand years, but for about 1,200 or 1,300 years. It really goes back to Anglo-Saxon times. I sincerely hope it will go on until all of us have left the House, and till the House itself will probably have fallen into natural ruin.

Dr. ADDISON: The House will have listened with great interest to the ancient history of Romney Marshes. There are other drainage authorities that are several hundreds of years old. If we are to begin exemptions, we should never know where to stop. We have to make up our minds that we are going to have a system working uniformly, and that we are not going to pick out this body or the other on the ground of its antiquity. The very ancient bodies are usually extraordinarily efficient; so is the body mentioned in the Amendment, very efficient indeed. I think it has pride of place as well as pride of name. At the same time I do not think that there is anything
undignified about this authority becoming a catchment area authority. It is true that their obsolete method of appointing commissioners will have to disappear and give way to other methods. I am afraid that there is no particular reason why we should single out this body. There are two or three other bodies for whom similar claims would be made, and without any disrespect to the length of service of this authority, I can see no reason for making an exception in its case.

Mr. GUINNESS: I am very disappointed at the rigid attitude of the Minister and I do not think it is the case that, if he excepted the Romney Marsh authority, it would lead to any kind of difficulty and set a precedent for excepting other boards. The Royal Commission laid special stress on the unique position of that authority, which has existed since before this Assembly was even known as a Parliament. It seems to me that there is a strong claim on grounds, partly of sentiment, but also on grounds of administration, for keeping this organisation alive. The Minister did not apply himself to the strongest argument of my right hon. Friend—that there really is no main river in that area. He told us, I think, that there were 60 islands and that the only considerable watercourse is a canal, in no way concerned with drainage. The whole essence of the functions of the catchment authority is that they are to administer the main river the Minister has to produce a map of the main river, and the authority has to be concerned with the banks and the efficiency of the main river, and with no other direct administrative work. The Romney Marsh authority were never heard upon the details of their system. They have been put into the Schedule without the Royal Commission—in the opinion of the Romney Marsh authority itself—being aware of the position, and they ask to be taken out. There is nothing final in such an omission. If there is any need to bring them in, they can always be covered by an order of the Minister, and that would enable them to have the hearing which they have claimed, but so far have not received.
The object of the Bill is to bring into contribution the upland areas which, so far, have escaped any responsibility for the cost of voiding the water which falls
from those lands. That condition does not apply to Romney Marsh. The whole catchment area is already, I understand, within the administration of the authority. They rate the whole of the catchment area at present, on a well-established basis, and therefore no new source of contributions is going to be brought to the support of this body. This body is not a commission of sewers, but something far earlier—a pre-historic body. Tradition does count, and when we have a body like this going back to the earliest origin of self-government, we ought to keep it, as it were, in a museum. When an upstart body like Parliament lays down laws for an ancient body like that which governs Romney Marsh, one is reminded of the schoolboy phrase, that it is a case of teaching our grandmother to suck eggs. As they are doing their work very efficiently, I cannot see that there is any sound case for upsetting their constitution by putting it on an elective basis. The Royal Commission reported that there was considerable justification for the system of nomination. In that way you get people who would not serve on an elected body. Even in these democratic days we have many nominated bodies doing their work very well. I know that they are not popular with hon. Members opposite. We know the turn up that the Government had 10 days ago over a nominated body. Yet these bodies have performed their function for the public good for many centuries, and it is a thousand pities that in the interests of rigid uniformity we should blot them from our present system.

Mr. DIXEY: I would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to show a certain amount of sympathy towards this Amendment. He must realise that this particular body was commended by the Royal Commission. He does not dispute that it is a most efficient body. They have not a river in the catchment area and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman must admit that here is an efficient body which is carrying on its work, and that it will be a weakness if you remove that efficient body which is carrying on well work which in the first place was done by private enterprise. Hon. Members behind the Minister are always in favour of State-subsidised schemes but surely he, as a practical man, must appreciate the
fact that if you have a body of people who are discharging their duties in a proper way and administering their area efficiently it is in his interest and in the interest of good government that that body should remain intact.

Dr. ADDISON: If this Amendment were carried this particular body would be taken out of the Schedule, and others would apply to be taken out.

Mr. MILLS: This is a very ancient drainage board. Would it not be possible to include it in a new scheme but at the same time to allow it to retain its ancient name? There are several boards of this kind which might well be allowed to retain their old name whilst carrying on their new functions.

Dr. ADDISON: That is what I was going to say. What will happen will be that these bodies will be set up as catchment area boards, and I have no doubt that they will retain the same name. If they were set up as an internal district board in any other area, every sensible person would wish that they should retain the same name. This particular body will be in charge of a somewhat larger area and will be eligible to receive grants of assistance if required. They will become a body constituted on the same lines as other bodies and will enjoy some of their age-long privileges. I am sure that the Kent County Council and everybody else will wish to preserve the traditions and name of this autho-

rity, but that is no reason for omitting it from the Schedule.

Mr. ARTHUR MICHAEL SAMUEL: I have some little interest in this district, for my father-in-law and mother-in-law are buried there. On archaeological grounds we should do something to preserve ancient corporations of this kind. There is no doubt that this authority has a number of charters which run back to the time of Alfred, and if it is merged in the greater authority, these charters will perhaps fall into disuse, and pass into other hands. Whether this Amendment be carried or not, the identity of this board should be preserved, and there should be some arrangement made so that the charters under which it works1should be kept alive, even though it may be subsidiary to the larger authority which will come into being. We are doing all we can day after day to maintain national monuments. If this had been a building or the ruin of an abbey, we should have protested against any interference with it. We ought to see that old institutions with charters such as this body has should not have their identity merged in a larger body, and I urge the Minister to take some steps to see that this body is kept alive and allowed to work under licence from the larger body.

Question put, "That the word Romney' stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 207; Noes, 95.

Division No. 470]
AYES.
[11.39 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cape, Thomas
Granville, E.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Charleton, H. C.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Cra[...]g[...]e M.
Chater, Daniel
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hilisbro')
Church, Major A. G.
Groves, Thomas E.


Alpass, J. H.
Clarke, J. S.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Ammon, Charles George
Cluse, W. S.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Arnott, John
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Hardie, George D.


Ayles, Walter
Compton, Joseph
Harris, Percy A.


Barnes, Alfred John
Daggar, George
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Barr, James
Dalton, Hugh
Haycock, A. W.


Batey, Joseph
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hayday, Arthur


Bellamy, Albert
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hayes, John Henry


Benson, G.
Duncan, Charles
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Ede, James Chuter
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Birkett, W. Norman
Edmunds, J. E.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Herriotts, J.


Bowen, J. W.
Elmley, Viscount
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Foot, Isaac
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Bromley, J.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Hoffman, P. C.


Brooke, W.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Hopkin, Daniel


Brothers, M.
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Horrabin, J. F.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Gibbins, Joseph
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Buchanan, G.
Gill, T. H.
Isaacs, George


Burgess, F. G.
Glassey, A. E.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Gossling, A. G.
Johnston, Thomas


Cameron, A. G.
Gould, F.
Jones, F. Llewellyn (Flint)


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Matters, L. W.
Sherwood, G. H.


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Maxton, James
Shield, George William


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Melville, Sir James
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Kelly, W. T.
Messer, Fred
Shillaker, J. F.


Kennedy, Thomas
Middleton, G.
Sinkinson, George


Kinley, J.
Mills, J. E.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Milner, Major J.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Lathan, G.
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lawrence, Susan
Mort, D. L.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Moses, J. J. H.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lawson, John James
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Strauss, G. R.


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Muff, G.
Sullivan, J.


Leach, W.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Sutton, J. E.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Murnin, Hugh
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Naylor, T. E.
Thurtle, Ernest


Lees, J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Tinker, John Joseph


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Tout, W. J.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Townend, A. E.


Logan, David Gilbert
Palln, John Henry
Vaughan, D. J.


Longbottom, A. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Viant, S. P.


Longden, F.
Perry, S. F.
Walker, J.


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wallace, H. W.


Lunn, William
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Potts, John S.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Pybus, Percy John
Wellock, Wilfred


McElwee, A.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Welsh, James (Paisley)


McEntee, V. L.
Raynes, W. R.
West, F. R.


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Richards, R.
Westwood, Joseph


McKinlay, A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


MacLaren, Andrew
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Ritson, J.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


McShane, John James
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Mender, Geoffrey le M.
Romeril, H. G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mansfield, W.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Marcus, M.
Rowson, Guy
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Markham, S. F.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Wise, E. F.


Marley, J.
Sanders, W. S.



Marshall, Fred
Sawyer, G. F.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mathers, George
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel
Ganzoni, Sir John
Rathbone, Eleanor


Ashley, Lt.-col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Asks, Sir Robert
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Atholl, Duchess of
Gray, Milner
Salmon, Major I.


Balniel, Lord
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Blindell, James
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hammersley, S. S.
Savery, S. S.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Hanbury, C.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Boyce, H. L.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Smithers, Waldron


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Hartington, Marquess of
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Haslam, Henry C.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Butler, F. A.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Thomson, Sir F.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,s.)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Tinne, J. A.


Chadwick, Capt, Sir Robert Burton
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Colfox, Major William Philip
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Train, J.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Ward, Lieut.-Col, Sir A. Lambert


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Wardlaw-Mline, J. S.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Mond, Hon. Henry
Warrender, Sir Victor


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Wells, Sydney R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil)
Muirhead, A. J.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Winterton. Rt. Hon. Earl


Everard, W. Lindsay
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Womersley, W. J.


Fermoy, Lord
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)



Fielden, E. B.
Penny, Sir George
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Sir William Wayland and Mr. Dixey.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Ramsbotham, H.

Amendment made: In page 72, line 17, column 2, after the word "Romney," insert the word "and."—[Dr. Addison.]

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to move, in page 72, line 31, column 2, to leave out the words "and Steeping River."
I cannot see why this river should be included in the Schedule. I base my case on simple natural justice, because there is no reason why the people living in the area of the Steeping River should have to bear any share of the cost of the upkeep of the Witham. These rivers are 20 miles apart, and the problems confronting the drainage of the River Witham are different from those confronting the Steeping River. I think it is most unfair that the people living in the Steeping River area should be brought into the adjoining area, with the result that they will be rated with the people living in the Witham River area. There is but small connection between the two and the area of the Steeping is separated from the uplands of the Witham. The principle of the Bill is that the people in the area of a main river should contribute to the upkeep of that river. To take two rivers, somewhat unequal, and to lump them together is an entire violation of that principle. There is all the more reason for opposing it, because it was not put into the original Bill, nor was it put in in another place, as it might have been. It was inserted in the last days of the Committee stage, and no opportunity has been given to the people concerned properly to consider the matter; otherwise, I would rather have moved this Amendment in Committee.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to second the Amendment.
This is a fore-taste of what will be apparent when the country realises what the Bill contains. It may be a small foretaste, but it is one which will be soon found out by the people concerned, who will have to be rather heavily rated. It is bad luck for the riparians of this comparatively small river.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. Member who moved the Amendment has conjured up much indignation, but I cannot imagine what the reasons for it are. Why should it be an injustice for the inhabitants along a river to be associated with their neighbours? I cannot see anything unjust about it, or any hardship. They are neighbours and will continue to be neighbours. I hope they will continue to be treated as neighbours and will be enabled thereby to get any assistance which the State may have to offer. I cannot see where the injustice comes in.

Major GEORGE DAVIES: I think the Minister's explanation is entirely unsatisfactory. It is very satisfactory to him no doubt to say that these people have been neighbours and will continue to be neighbours, but the Bill does not simply allow them to go on being neighbours but it makes them go through a marriage ceremony in which the husband is to be responsible for the debts of his wife. That may be provided for in the Finance Bill, but it is not an adequate explanation for the objections put forward. It may be true that my hon. Friend is labouring under a misapprehension and that, as a matter of fact, the rates on the one area will not be the burden which it has been suggested, but, if that be so, the Minister has not explained it. I think we are entitled to know whether the joining together of neighbours in holy matrimony is actually going to mean that a burden of rates is going to be imposed which is unjustifiable.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 185; Noes, 93.

Division No. 471.]
AYES.
[11.59 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Church, Major A. G.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Clarke, J. S.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bowen, J. W.
Cluse, W. S.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Cralgie M.
Brockway, A. Fenner
Cocks, Frederick Seymour


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Bromley, J.
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)


Alpass, J. H.
Brooke, W.
Compton, Joseph


Ammon, Charles George
Brothers, M.
Daggar, George


Arnott, John
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Dalton, Hugh


Attlee, Clement Richard
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)


Barnes, Alfred John
Buchanan, G.
Denman, Hon, R. D.


Barr, James
Burgess, F. G.
Duncan, Charles


Batey, Joseph
Caine, Derwent Hall-
Ede, James Chuter


Bellamy, Albert
Cameron, A. G.
Edmunds, J. E.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Edwards, E.(Morpeth)


Benson, G.
Charleton, H. C.
Foot, Isaac


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Ritson, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Logan, David Gilbert
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)


Gibson, H. M. (Lance, Mossley)
Longbottom, A. W.
Romeril, H. G.


Gill, T. H.
Longden, F.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Gossling, A. G.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Rowson, Guy


Gould, F.
Lunn, William
Samuel, H. Waiter (Swansea, West)


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Sanders, W. S.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Sawyer, G. F.


Groves, Thomas E.
McElwee, A.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Grundy, Thomas W.
McEntee, V. L.
Sherwood, G. H.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Shield, George William


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
McKinley, A.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Hardie, George D.
Mac Laren, Andrew
Shillaker, J. F.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
McShane, John James
Sinkinson, George


Haycock, A. W.
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Hayday, Arthur
Mansfield, W.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hayes, John
Henry Marcus, M.
Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)


Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Marley, J.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Marshall, Fred
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Mathers, George
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Herriotts, J.
Matters, L. W.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hirst, G. H. (York W.R. Wentworth)
Maxton, James
Strauss, G. R.


Hoffman, P. C.
Melville, Sir James
Sullivan, J.


Hopkin, Daniel
Messer, Fred
Sutton, J. E.


Horrabin, J. F.
Milner, Major J.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Morley, Ralph
Thurtle, Ernest


Isaacs, George
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Tinker, John Joseph


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Tout, W. J.


Johnston, Thomas
Mort, D. L.
Vaughan, D. J.


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Moses, J. J. H.
Walker, J.


Jewett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Wallace, H. W.


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Muff, G.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Kelly, W. T.
Murnin, Hugh
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Kennedy, Thomas
Naylor, T. E.
Wellock, Wilfred


Kinley, J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Noel Baker, P. J.
Westwood, Joseph


Lathan, G.
Oldfield, J. R.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Palln, John
Henry Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lawrence, Susan
Parkinson, John Alien (Wigan)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Perry, S. F.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Lawson, John James
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester-Loughb'gh)


Leach, W.
Potts, John S.
Wise, E. F.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Rathbone, Eleanor



Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Richards, R.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Lees, J.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Pybus, Percy John


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Glassey, A. E.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Aske, Sir Robert
Granville, E.
Ramsbotham, H.


Balniel, Lord
Gray, Milner
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Blindell, James
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Salmon, Major I.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Hanbury, C.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Bracken, B.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Harris, Percy A.
Savery, S. S.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hartington, Marquess of
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Smithers, Waldron


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Butler, R. A.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Jones, F. Llewellyn (Flint)
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Knox, Sir Alfred
Thomson, Sir F.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Train, J.


Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Mond, Hon. Henry
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Dixey, A. C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Elmley, Viscount
Muirhead, A. J.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Wells, Sydney R.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Fielden, E. B.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Womersley, W. J.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)



Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Penny, Sir George
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Mr. Haslam and Lieut.-Colonel Heneage.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 73, to leave out lines 23 to 27.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: Why does the right hon. Gentleman propose to leave out these words? What does he propose to do instead? What penalties is he going to substitute? We certainly want an explanation. It must be more than a drafting Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: There was a consensus of opinion in the Committee and now that these boards have become elected boards, the power vested in the Minister is not appropriate. We think, therefore, that this matter ought to come under the same rule.

Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — SECOND SCHEDULE.—(Part 1: General Provisions. Part 11: Provisions Applicable to Orders which are Pro- visional if opposed.)

Amendments made: In page 75, line 20, leave out the word "or."

In line 20, after the second word "authority," insert the words "harhour authority or conservancy authority."

In line 27, leave out paragraph 3.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 76, line 32, at the end, to insert the words:

Orders of the Day — Part III.

Provisions with respect to the Validity of Orders not confirmed by Parliament.

1. So soon as may be after an order has effect the Minister shall publish in the 'London Gazette,' and in such other manner as he thinks best adapted for informing persons affected, a notice stating that the order has come into force, and naming a place where a copy thereof may be seen at all reasonable hours.

2. If any person aggrieved by an order desires to question its validity on the ground that it is not within the powers of this Act or that any requirement of this Act has not been complied with he may, within six weeks after the publication of the notice mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, make an application for the purpose to the High Court, and, if any such application is duly made, the court, if satisfied that the order is not within the powers of this Act or that the interests of the applicant have been substantially prejudiced by any requirements of this Act not having been complied with, may quash the order either generally or in so far as it affects the applicant.

3. Subject to the provisions of the last preceding paragraph an order shall not at any time be questioned by prohibition or certiorai or in any legal proceedings whatsoever.

4. Except by leave of the court of appeal no appeal shall lie to the House of Lords from a decision of the court of appeal in proceedings under this section."

Lieut. - Colonel HENEAGE: This Amendment shows the disadvantage from which the House is suffering through the Government introducing a lot of Amendments at this late hour. We certainly desire an explanation from the Minister of what exactly is meant by this Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. and gallant Member has no doubt forgotten that I said that I would set out in the Schedule the precise manner in which these Orders would be made, and it is in order to carry out that undertaking that this Amendment has been moved. The provisions with respect to the Orders are reproduced in the Schedule in order to remove any doubts upon the matter.

Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — THIRD SCHEDULE.—(Drainage Boards.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 76, line 39, to leave out from the word "who," to the end of line 2 in page 77, and to insert instead thereof the words:
at the date of the election own or occupy land on which a drainage rate has been levied in the year immediately preceding:
Provided that a person shall not be entitled to be an elector by reason of his occupation of any land if at the date of the election any amount demanded in respect of any drainage rate levied on that land has remained unpaid for more than a month, and a person shall not be entitled to be an elector by reason of his ownership of any land if at the date of the election any amount demanded in respect of any owner's drainage rate levied on that land has remained unpaid for more than one month.

Sir J. LAMB: Evidently this is a manuscript Amendment, and I do not know what the Amendment really means.

Dr. ADDISON: I understand that this is the Amendment which is consequential upon the alteration of Clause 26 of the Bill, and which, according to the existing practice, should be reproduced here.

Sir W. WAYLAND: On a point of Order. I understood that my Amendment—in page 78, line 6, after the word
"owner," to insert the words "either absolutely or for life"—would be accepted by the Minister.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Robert Young): We have not yet come to that Amendment. I have three manuscript Amendments to dispose of.

Mr. DIXEY: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman why an important Amendment like the present Amendment is handed in at this stage? Hon. Members on this side of the House do not understand the explanation at all. May we have a detailed explanation?

Dr. ADDISON: I am sorry that I have to move this manuscript Amendment. The necessity was only finally confirmed this afternoon. I do assure hon. Members that it is not an alteration of the law, but is simply in order to bring the Bill as now amended into conformity with existing practice. I am very sorry these Amendments were not put in before. I did not know of them myself until this afternoon.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I do not know whether the Minister realises that here for the first time we have what seems to be a change rather in principle. If you apply this to the Parliamentary electorate then anybody who has not paid his taxes is not allowed to elect a Member of Parliament, or anyone who has not paid his rates is not allowed to elect local government representatives. I think we must have an explanation from the Minister as to whether this is not a new principle, that anyone who has not paid drainage rates cannot elect to the drainage body. Personally, having in mind the extremely difficult situation in Lincolnshire, I think there will be considerable hardship caused if this is brought in and it will be a regular weapon to intimidate the electorate on behalf of the Minister or any policy that he wants and that they disagree with.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. and gallant Member is under a misapprehension. All we are seeking to do is to see that these elections are based on the existing law.

Mr. DIXEY: As far as I can understand the Minister, you might just as well argue that if a man has not paid his rates and taxes he shall not be entitled to vote at Parliamentary elections. That
is a principle with which hon. Members opposite would not agree. This does, in fact, institute a new principle entirety in the voting of this country.

Dr. ADDISON: If the hon. Member had had to administer the law he would know that those who pay special drainage rates vote according to the amount for which they are assessed. I am not altering the law but only requiring that that provision shall be continued in this Bill.

Mr. DIXEY: I want to have this point made clear. The right hon. Gentleman's excuse is that he is altering this method of control. If that is so why does he not sweep aside a voting power which is entirely wrong in these democratic days. The payment of rates and taxes should not enter into the question at all.

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. Member should have challenged the point on Clause 24 under which drainage rates are paid, I am afraid the hon. Member has not considered the earlier parts of the Bill. This does not create any new principle.

Mr. EVERARD: We have reached a most extraordinary position. When the right hon. Gentleman for Hythe (Sir P. Sassoon) proposes to continue something which has been running for over 1,200 years the Minister of Agriculture turns it down because it is old and obsolete, but now he seriously asks us to maintain a system of election which he admits has gone on for 400 years and which is totally different to any other form of election on the ground that it is the best method of election for this particular purpose. Although it is after twelve o'clock and this is a long manuscript Amendment, I am glad that hon. Members have kept the debate going long enough for some of us to understand what the proposal really does mean. I had some doubt as to what I should do on the Third Reading of the Bill, but having seen the slipshod manner in which this legislation is being brought forward I shall take every opportunity of voting against the Measure.

Sir B. PETO: Let me put this point to the right hon. Gentleman. Suppose that a heavy drainage rate has been imposed by a drainage authority are we to understand that if an election is pending
that everyone has to pay this heavy drainage rate to which they object as being excessive before they can vote, and that if they do not pay they are not to have the opportunity of voting for a new drainage authority and a different policy? That is what this proposal undoubtedly means. No one will be able to make any effective protest against an excessive rate until they have paid the rate to which they object. I cannot imagine a more undemocratic proposal, and the argument that this has existed for 400 years comes strangely from a Government who are

supposed to be advanced in their views and always ready to take up new causes. It is an extraordinary proposal to deprive people who elect drainage boards of any electoral power whatever unless they first pay the rate against which they are protesting. If that is the way this legislation is managed and pushed through this House no protest is strong enough and we ought to divide against it.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 78; Noes, 164.

Division No. 472.]
AYES.
[12.20 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Penny, Sir George


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fielden, E. B.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Aske, Sir Robert
Foot, Isaac
Pybus, Percy John


Atholl, Duchess of
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Ramsbotham, H.


Bainiel, Lord
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Bird, Ernest Roy
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Blindell, James
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Glassey, A. E.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Granville, E.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Gray, Milner
Smithers, Waldron


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Butler, R. A.
Hanbury, C
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Carver, Major W. H.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Train, J.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Turton, Robert Hugh


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Jones, F. Llewellyn (Flint)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Knox, Sir Alfred
Wells, Sydney R.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Dixey, A. C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Womersley, W. J.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)



Elmley, Viscount
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Everard, W. Lindsay
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Captain Sir George Bowyer and Captain Wallace.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Compton, Joseph
Herriotts, J.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Daggar, George
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Dalton, Hugh
Hoffman, P. C.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hopkin, Daniel


Alpass, J. H.
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Arnott, John
Duncan, Charles
Isaacs, George


Barnes, Alfred John
Ede, James Chuter
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Barr, James
Edmunds, J. E.
Johnston, Thomas


Batey, Joseph
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Bellamy, Albert
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Kennedy, Thomas


Benson, G.
Gibbins, Joseph
Kinley, J.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gill, T. H.
Lathan, G.


Bowen, J. W.
Gossling, A. G.
Law, A. (Rosendale)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gould, F.
Lawrence, Susan


Brooke, W.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Brothers, M.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawson, John James


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Groves, Thomas E.
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Grundy, Thomas W.
Leach, W.


Buchanan, G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)


Burgess, F. G.
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Hardie, George D.
Lees, J.


Cameron, A, G.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Haycock, A. W.
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Charleton, H. C.
Hayday, Arthur
Logan, David Gilbert


Church, Major A. G.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Longden, F.


Clarke, J. S.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Palin, John Henry
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


McElwee, A.
Paling, Wilfrid
Stamford, Thomas W.


McEntee, V. L.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Strauss, G. R.


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Perry, S. F.
Sullivan, J.


Mckinlay, A.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Sutton, J. E.


MacLaren, Andrew
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


McShane, John James
Potts, John S.
Thurtle, Ernest


Mansfield, W.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Tinker, John Joseph


Marcus, M.
Richardson, R.(Houghton-le-Spring)
Tout, W. J.


Marley, J.
Ritson, J.
Vaughan, D. J.


Marshall, Fred
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)
Wallace, H. W.


Mathers, George
Romeril, H. G.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhodda)


Maxton, James
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Messer, Fred
Rowson, Guy
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Milner, Major [...]
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Wellock, Wilfred


Morley, Ralph
Sanders, W. S.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Morrison, Herbert (Hacknay, South)
Sawyer, G. F.
Westwood, Joseph


Mort, D. L.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Whiteley wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Moses, J. J. H.
Sherwood, G. H.
Williams Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Shield, George William
Williams, T. (York, Don valley)


Muff, G.
Shillaker, J. F.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Murnin, Hugh
Sinkinson, George
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Leughb'gh)


Naylor, T. E.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Wise, E. F.


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)



Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Oldfield, J. R.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Mr. Hayes and Mr. William Whiteley.


Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)



Question put, and agreed to.

Proposed words there inserted in the Bill.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move in page 77, line 5, to leave out from the word "following" to the end of line 8, and to insert instead thereof the word "scale."

Sir N. STEWART SANDEMAN: Can we have an explanation of this manuscript Amendment?

Mr. DIXEY: What is the meaning of this Amendment?

Dr. ADDISON: In the Bill, as it was before, we provided for rates according to acreage. This Schedule provides a scale for votes according to acreage. We have now struck out of the Bill the acreage provisions and necessarily a Schedule, which prescribes the number of votes that a man ought to get according to what he paid in this way, must also disappear from the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move in page 77, line 21, leave out from the beginning to the end of line 39.
This Amendment deletes the acreage specification for votes.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: We are going to leave out everything to do with voting according to acreage. What is the right hon. Gentleman going to put in its place? Has he some other scheme? Is he going to alter the total number of members?

Dr. ADDISON: The hon. and gallant Member will remember that under the Bill annual value takes the place of acreage, and the part relating to annual value is on the upper part of the page and still remains in the Bill. That qualification for votes still remains; the acreage portion, however, disappears.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir W. WAYLAND: I beg to move, in page 78, line 6, to leave out the words "absolutely entitled as owner to," and to insert instead thereof the words; "the owner of."

This is a manuscript Amendment. Part 11 of this Schedule reads as follows:
No person shall be qualified for election as a member of a drainage board unless he is … absolutely entitled as owner to not less than 10 acres of land …

This wording shuts out the owner for life and so the Minister has accepted this Amendment, which will not exclude the owner for life.

Mr. HASLAM: I beg to second the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 78, line 13, to leave out the words, "a hereditament," and to insert instead thereof the word "land."

This Amendment simply makes it clear that land is referred to.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 78, line 17, to leave out paragraph (d), and to insert instead thereof the words:
 (d) a person nominated as a candidate for election by the owner (whether the owner is an individual or a body of persons) of land which is situate in the electoral district in question, and is either of not less than 10 acres in extent or of the annual value of thirty pounds or upwards.

Sir E. SHEPPERSON: Is it the intention of this new paragraph that a person nominated by an owner must himself be the owner of not less than 10 acres in extent?

Dr. ADDISON: That is so.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 78, line 22, to leave out from the word "no," to the end of paragraph, and to insert instead thereof the words:
person shall be deemed to be qualified as aforesaid as being an occupier of any land if at the date of the election any amount demanded in respect of any drainage rate levied on that land has remained unpaid for more than one month, and no person shall be deemed to be qualified as aforesaid as being the owner, or a person nominated by the owner, of any land if at the date of the election any amount demanded in respect of any owner's drainage rate levied in respect of that land has remained unpaid for more than one month.

This is to fulfil an undertaking that I gave in Committee with regard to disqualification.

Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — SIXTH SCHEDULE.—(Appointment of Con- servators of River Thames.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 86, line 16, column 1, to leave out the words "Kingston-upon-Thames."
This Amendment is in confirmation of an undertaking I gave in Committee whereby a change is made in this group represented by four conservators. It was arranged in order to secure as far as possible an equal distribution of representation, that they should be grouped in two sections with two members each. I have grouped them, as far as I can, fairly geographically, and two members are allotted to each group in accordance with the undertaking I gave about these Thames Valley representatives. This and the following Amendments all hang together.

Sir GEORGE PENNY: I am very glad to see that Kingston-upon-Thames is getting a little larger representation, but I would like to know how they have been grouped. The right hon. Gentleman tells us that Kingston-upon-Thames has been regrouped. Will he kindly tell me where it appears?

Dr. ADDISON: Kingston-upon-Thames goes out of line 16 and the first group finishes with Walton and Sunbury. The second group then begins with "the council of the borough of Kingston-upon-Thames and the councils of the urban districts of East and West Molesey." The Amendment means bringing Kingston-upon-Thames in as head of the second Thames Valley section.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: There is a point here very important, to the 86 miles of river mentioned. To the Minister, this part of the river owes gratitude for having increased this representation to four, and will appreciate the concession. I do not, however, think that grouping will be so much appreciated. Abingdon to Sunbury is 78 miles, and these 78 miles include five boroughs and eight urban district councils. They are to have two representatives, as against from Sunbury downwards—eight miles with one borough and six urban district councils. I would suggest that a much fairer representation might be made as the counties of Surrey and Middlesex are getting three representatives as against two representatives each for the counties of Berks and Bucks which contain the 78 miles. The natural geographical division between the two stretches of the river comes first near Runnymede where Middlesex meets Berkshire. If it is impossible to make the change now, the right hon. Gentleman should, in another place, make the change of representation on a more equitable footing. He should take the stretch from Abingdon for 61 miles. That would be still leaving five boroughs in that, stretch, and then 18 miles below that, which world have only one borough and two representatives.

Captain HENDERSON: I would reinforce the arguments of my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor (Mr. A. Somerville) from another angle—the rateable value of those municipal authorities who will have to pay a large proportion of
the rates. They will have a minority representation. I also thank the right hon. Gentleman for the way in which he has met my colleagues in the Committee. I think he could see a way to give fairer representation on the lower stretches of the Thames.

Dr. ADDISON: I think that, as a matter of fact, we have met the point. The hon. Member will be interested to know the rateable value of the two sections. For one section, beginning at Abingdon and including Walton, it is £1,138,041. For the other section, Kingston and East and West Molesey, it is £1,128,745. They are so equally divided that the difference in the rateable value is only about £10,000.

Captain HENDERSON: I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. EDE: The right hon. Gentleman has inserted this at the request of the Surrey County Council made by me during the Committee stage. I wish to express our appreciation. The right hon. Gentleman has managed fairly to divide the representation so that there shall be up-river and down-river representation and representation of those interests which are mainly commercial, like Kingston, and those up-river regions which are associated with pleasure seeking. He has done so without either being swamped.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments made:

In page 86, line 20, column 1, after the word "Walton," insert the word "and."

In line 20, column 1, leave out the words "East and West."

In line 20, column 2, insert the word "Two."

In line 21, column 1, at the beginning, insert the words:

"By the council of the borough of Kingston-upon-Thames and the councils the urban districts of East and West."

In line 22, column 2, leave out the word "Four," and insert instead thereof the word "Two."

In line 23, leave out the word "three."

In line 23, leave out the second word "the," and insert instead thereof the word "several."

In line 24, leave out from the word "councils," to the word "shall," in line 25.—[Dr. Addison.]

Motion made, and Question proposed:
That the Bill be re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House in respect of the Amendments to Clause 24 and Clause 29, standing in the name of Dr. Addison as Amendments to be moved on re-committal."—[Dr. Addison.]

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in line 2, after the word "Amendments," to insert the words:
standing on the Order Paper in the name of Colonel Wedgwood, to Clause 23, page 21, line 37, and Clause 23, page 22, line 6, and the Amendments.
The object of the two Amendments is to give to county councils and county boroughs the same powers of differential rating, or making special rates on property which is specially benefited, as is already enjoyed by the drainage boards.

Sir J. LAMB: This Amendment is not printed. We do not know what it is, and we ought to have an explanation of what it means.

Dr. ADDISON: I understand that it is quite a separate matter that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman wants to discuss.

Mr. E. BROWN: Surely the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is entitled to the chance to argue his case?

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I submit that if this Motion is carried without my Amendment I shall not be able to argue my case on the Committee stage.

Bill accordingly considered in Committee.

[Mr. ROBERT YOUNG in the Chair.]

Orders of the Day — CLAUSE 23.—(Expenses of county councils and county borough councils)

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I beg to move, in page 21, line 37, to leave out from the word "shall," to the end of the Sub-section, and to insert instead thereof the words:
be defrayed in one or other of the following ways according as the county council,
having regard to the benefit, if any, derived by various areas, think just and equitable, that is to say—
(a) as expenses for general county purposes; or
 (b) as expenses for special county purposes chargeable on such part or parts of the county within the catchment area as the council think fit; or
 (c) by apportioning it between and charging it on such portions of the catchment area and in such proportions as the council think fit and by the issue of precepts accordingly to rating authorities.
There are two Amendments, but they are to the same purpose. In one case the county is included in the one catchment area, and the other in which it is partly in one catchment area and partly in another. The intention is that the county council should have the same power of levying heavier rates on property in connection with the drainage scheme as is already possessed in the Bill by the internal drainage board.

Dr. ADDISON: The Amendment of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman really embodies in respect of (a) and (b) powers already possessed, and as the Amendment is quite common to the rest of the Bill, I have no objection to it.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: Has the Minister had any communication from the Municipal Corporations' Association about this Amendment? I understand that the Association is opposed to this principle. They argue that the discretion should not be left to the county council, and, therefore, they were hoping that the Government would not accept the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: I have not had any communication myself, but I understand that there is no objection in principle.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 22, line 6, leave out from the word "shall," to the end of the Sub-section, and insert instead thereof the words:
be defrayed in one or other of the following ways according as the council of the borough, having regard to the benefit, if any, derived by various areas, think just and equitable, that is to say—

(a) out of the general rate fund of the borough; or
(b) out of the proceeds of an additional item of the general rate levied in such part of the borough within the catchment area as the council think fit; or
216
(c) out of the proceeds of several additional items of the general rate levied at such differential rates and in such parts of the borough within the catchment area as the council think fit."—[Colonel Wedgwood.]

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Orders of the Day — CLAUSE 24.—(Rating powers of drainage boards other than catchment boards.)

Amendment made: In page 23, line 13, leave out the words "an agricultural hereditament," and insert instead thereof the words "agricultural land."—[Dr. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 14, to leave out the word "hereditament," and to insert instead thereof the word "land."

1.0 a.m.

Mr. TURTON: I would like to ask the Minister if it is the intention to include all industrial hereditaments, and on what scale buildings will be rated in an industrial area under this Sub-section?

Dr. ADDISON: The rating will be on the annual value of agricultural land or any other land. The word "hereditament" merely means any other land.

Amendment agreed to.

Consequential Amendments made.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 36, at the end, to insert the words:
Provided that the annual value of the adjoining land shall for the purposes of this sub-section be deemed to be reduced by such proportion thereof, if any, as is in the opinion of the drainage board ascribable to buildings.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I think that some explanation of these words is wanted. It looks like the beginning of the taxation of land values.

Dr. ADDISON: This is only to provide that a railway company's sheds on such land shall be considered at the value of the sheds.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Orders of the Day — CLAUSE 29.—(Meaning of "agricultural land" and of "annual value.")

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 27, line 29, to leave out the words "cottage gardens exceeding one quarter of an acre."
This Amendment arises out of a discovery made by an hon. Member that the cottage garden of a quarter of an acre, being excluded from the definition of agricultural land, is rated on its full annual value, which is not fair to the cottage gardener.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 27, line 39, to leave out from the word "race-course" to the end of line 43.

Mr. TURTON: I am very glad that the Minister has changed his mind about this Amendment. We had a discussion of about an hour and a half on it in Committee, and I would like to remind the Minister of what he said then. He said:
As far as this particular Amendment is concerned, I am surprised that an hon. Gentleman learned in the law should want to move this Amendment, because, if it were carried, it would make the Clause rubbish."—[OFFICIAL REPORT (Standing Committee C), 17th July, 1930; col, 330.]

Those are the words the Minister used.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 28, line 2, leave out the word "hereditament" and insert instead thereof the word "land."—[Dr. Addison.]

Consequential Amendment made.

Further Amendment made: In page 28, line 8, leave out the word "property," and insert instead thereof the word "land."—[Dr. Addison.]

Consequential Amendments made.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Mr. TURTON: I want to appeal to the Minister to cut out the words "including allotment gardens." I think he appreciates that this Clause needs improvement. It is unfair in the whole of its incidence upon land. You have this land, which is really agricultural land, paying the higher rate, while the richer people are assessed at only one-third of the value. At present the allotment pays two-thirds and the garden attached to a mansion house only one-third.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: At present the park attached to the mansion is rated at the lower scale of one-third, where exactly similar farm land is dealt with at the full scale. The words "and park" ought to cover that, and would have come out if it had been moved earlier.

Mr. A. SOMERVILLE: I should like to support the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton) in what he has said regarding allotments. Those who take an interest in allotments—which means the whole Committee—will support his appeal to the Minister.

Sir J. LAMB: There is one point. So far as I understand, parks are considered to be agricultural land if used for agricultural purposes. If they are not so used, but only for parks, then they are rated for parks.

Dr. ADDISON: I recognise the force of the argument. At the same time, you have to remember that when once you begin to make these qualifications, you may open the door to great trouble. As they are not on the Paper, I will endeavour to see if any arrangement can be made, but as it stands I cannot accept them.

Mr. DIXEY: Why not put them in as manuscript Amendments now?

Bill reported; as amended on re-committal, considered.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Colonel WEDGWOOD: I hate having to move the rejection of this Bill at this hour. This sort of Bill will ruin the Labour party if this kind of thing is repeated. It is a thoroughly bad Bill. The Minister in charge is a thoroughly good Minister, and he has my complete sympathy. He was not the Minister who grabbed on this Bill. He is the unfortunate successor of another Minister. This Bill was drafted two years ago. The preceding Government, knowing the criticism to which the Bill was open, failed to bring it in for two years.

Mr. GUINNESS: Absolutely untrue!

Colonel WEDGWOOD: It was not brought in.

Mr. GUINNESS: It was not drafted.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: But the Royal Commission reported three years ago when a Bill on these lines was drafted.

Mr. GUINNESS: Untrue !

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The present Government inherited it from their predecessors. I should like the House to understand what this Bill does. Up to now drainage areas and drainage schemes were financed from the people whose property was improved by the drainage scheme. Some years ago there was trouble in the Ouse basin because the people who were rated objected to paying. The result of the Royal Commission is that the charge for draining the rivers of England has been transferred in part from the people who inherited that expenditure to the ratepayers of the country as a whole. It has been a long struggle. I ask the House to observe that the agricultural interests in this country have gradually got rid of the rates on agricultural land by stages and transferred them to the taxpayers of the country. And now they are pursuing the same line of getting rid of the burden of draining agricultural land to the ratepayers of the country. That is particularly bad in the case of drainage. Take the Thames Valley. We all know that a large part of the Thames Valley is flooded periodically every year, and a large number of meadows by the side of the river are valueless for housing purposes because of this flooding. The ratepayers of this country and the other contributories will be spending a large sum of money for draining the Thames basin, making the lower river in such a position that it can carry away the water that floods the banks higher up. What will be the immediate result of that? Land which was not worth £5 an acre being flooded, will come to be admirable land for up-riverside residences and worth perhaps £1,000 pounds an acre. You are making a gigantic present to the owners of that sort of property and at the same time taking it from those people and putting it on to the ratepayers.
Then as to the second part of this scheme. The ratepayers of this country have had a pretty bad time lately. The derating scheme of the right hon.
Gentleman opposite has put up the rates of all the ratepayers on the countryside and to a large extent in the boroughs also. The rates have been going up on the smaller class of people, not so much on the farmers who got their land exempted, but the small people in the country feel the burden of rates. The ratepayers will remember that this Bill and the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman previously have increased their rates. Take the way in which it is done. You are establishing all over the country a new series of administrative bodies. Fifty catchment boards will cover England, and these boards are new bureaucratic governors of England. Hon. Members no doubt will form part of these boards. They are paid boards; the chairman is paid. They will cost far more than county councils. They usurp part of the work of the county councils and just at a time when we in this country need to economise and bring the cost of administration as low as possible. You are imposing this new administration, costing £250,000 a year, entirely upon the unfortunate ratepayers of the country. At the same time these other people have votes in the long run. I would point out that these new administrative bodies—catchment boards—are not elected directly like the county councils, but they are indirectly elected by the county councils, nominated by the Ministry and the county boroughs. They are therefore not a democratic body and not directly responsible to the electorate of this country who pay their money. That is a step backwards in democracy.
But that is not all. Not only is the catchment board a reactionary body indirectly elected and not representing the people who pay, but the drainage boards, which still exist side by side with the new catchment board, are elected in this Bill on a basis which has shocked even hon. Members opposite, though, apparently, they have only just realised how that hoard is formed. The drainage boards are elected according to the property possessed by the elector. The richer man has 10 votes and the poorer man has one vote. This principle is introduced into a Land Drainage Bill in the year 1930 by a Labour Government. Nor is that all. Even under that system it might be possible to get Labour people elected or people of advanced ideas, but not a bit of it. Nobody can be elected
to those boards unless they themselves possess property of at least 10 acres. No one can be admitted into these sacred bodies, the drainage boards—which already number about 60, but will soon develop into about 600 aristocratic drainage boards—unless they own 10 acres. [Interruption.] Naturally hon. Members do not like hearing these things. There are many other points about this Bill I would like to go into. You are by this Bill putting on this country a new organisation duplicating the work of the county councils. Instead of giving greater powers to the county councils, and using the existing machinery, you invent an entirely new organisation with new staff and new buildings, an expense utterly unnecessary and supported entirely by hon. Members opposite. [HON. MEMBERS: "No !"] They voted for the Bill at all stages and in Committee upstairs.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: When the right hon. Gentleman makes a statement of that kind, is it not right that he should justify it by giving some illustrations?

Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid we cannot have illustrations.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: The hon. and galant Member will be able to speak afterwards. I want to know whether hon. Members opposite are going to vote against this Bill. If they will vote against this Bill on Third Reading, they are absolved from responsibility for it, but if they go into the Lobby with the Government, they are as responsible as we are for the effects of this Bill and for the complaints that the ratepayers will undoubtedly make. They will complain at the extra rate imposed as a result of this Measure, and I am afraid that it will be known as the Addison rate. We have had this Bill forced through because the two Front Benches got together. I ask hon. Members on this side of the House to remember that this Measure, brought in in another place on behalf of the permanent officials and the bureaucracy, is only a sample of what we are having. It Occurs nowhere in "Labour and the Nation." We have wasted our time over Bills like this and the Mental Treatment Bill, also a departmental Bill, and all the energies of the party, anxious for real reform and progress, get frittered away and ruined by Measures such as this, which disappoint the country, which dis-
appoint the party and which do no credit to the Government who bring them forward.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: We cannot leave the Third Reading debate in the way in which the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has left it. He is a very distinguished and a very experienced Parliamentarian. He has the idea that, if he could get the Conservative party to vote for the Third Reading, he would be able to go to the country and say that this Bill was entirely their Bill. But there are also Parliamentarians on this side, and they will not fall into this trap. In the Committee upstairs, we violently opposed this Bill as soon as we saw the bad points it contained. We consider this Bill an unfair Bill, unfair to the ratepayers and to the country. For that reason, we are going to vote against it.

Captain HENDERSON: We cannot pass this Bill without expressing our regret that it has not been possible to get into this Bill the recommendations of the Royal Commission. The whole point was that a special tribunal should be set up to safeguard and guide these powers through the very difficult points which will necessarily arise when this Bill is put into operation. In the briefest possible way, and with the strongest possible emphasis, I wish to say what a thousand pities it is that this Bill, which is a great Measure, should be so unfortunately marred by the abandonment of the recommendations of the Royal Commission which, if included, would have made the Bill such an engine for good.

Mr. ROSBOTHAM: I do not think we ought to conclude our labours on this Bill without paying a tribute to the Minister of Agriculture, who has been at his post for several hours without refreshment.

Sir B. PETO: I wish to vote against this Bill, but, as I do so for not a single reason stated by the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood), I feel I am entitled to state briefly my reasons. Whatever the merits still left in the scheme of this Bill—and it has been very seriously mutilated in Committee and on Report—there is no question to my mind that, whatever its merits may be,
this is no time to impose any fresh burden for works of this kind. We have failed entirely to get from the Government any agricultural policy. A Bill for the reclamation of fresh land should follow a policy of making farming pay. When you have got a policy that will make farmers cultivate further acres, you can then consider redeeming them from their water-logged condition at the enormous cost that this Bill will involve. When you put the cart before the horse, as the Government propose to do, and first propose a Measure to put further burdens upon agriculturists throughout the country before proposing anything which will make farming pay on these new lands, then you are doing something which is a disservice and not a service to agriculture.

I am afraid that this Bill will be used simply for unemployment relief and that the catchment boards will be urged by the Government to go in for costly schemes without any proper consideration of whether the expense will be justified. The hon. and gallant Member for Henley (Captain Henderson) has pointed out, that there is no appeal tribunal left in the Bill and no Exchequer contribution, except as the Minister approves. There is no guarantee that the Exchequer contribution will be even 1 per cent. For these reasons, I hope that many of my hon. Friends will vote against the Third Reading.

Question put, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

The House divided: Ayes, 150; Noes, 54.

Division No. 473.]
AYES.
[1.32 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hayday, Arthur
Oldfield, J. R.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hayes, John Henry
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)


Alpass, J. H.
Herriotts, J.
Palin, John Henry


Arnott, John
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Paling, Wilfrid


Aske, Sir Robert
Hoffman, P. C.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Barnes, Alfred John
Hopkin, Daniel
Perry, S. F.


Barr, James
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Batey, Joseph
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Potts, John S.


Bellamy, Albert
Isaacs, George
Pybus, Percy John


Benson, G.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Jones, F. Llewellyn (Flint)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Bondfieid, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Kelly, W. T.
Ritson, J.


Bowen, J. W.
Kennedy, Thomas
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Kinley, J.
Romeril, H. G.


Brooke, W.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Lathan, G.
Rowson, Guy


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Law, A. (Rosendale)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Lawrence, Susan
Sanders, W. S.


Burgess, F. G.
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Sawyer, G. F.


Calne, Derwent Hall
Lawson, John James
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Shield, George William


Charleton, H. C.
Leach, W.
Shillaker, J. F.


Church, Major A. G.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Clarke, J. S.
Lees, J.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Compton, Joseph
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Logan, David Gilbert
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Daggar, George
Longden, F.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Dalton, Hugh
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Strauss, G. R.


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
McElwee, A.
Thurtle, Ernest


Duncan, Charles
McEntee, V. L.
Tinker, John Joseph


Ede, James Chuter
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Tout, W. J.


Edmunds, J. E.
McShane, John James
Vaughan, D. J.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Mansfield, W.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornesy)


Elmley, Viscount
Marcus, M.
Wallace, H. W.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Marley, J.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Marshall, Fred
Wayland, Sir William A.


Gill, T. H.
Mathers, George
Wellock, Wilfred


Glassey, A. E.
Messer, Fred
Westwood, Joseph


Gossling, A. G.
Milner, Major J.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Gould, F.
Morley, Ralph
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mort, D. L.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Moses, J. J. H.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Muff, G.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester.Loughb'gh)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Murnin, Hugh



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Haycock, A. W.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Atholl, Duchess of
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bowdley)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Balniel, Lord
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Bird, Ernest Roy
Gray, Milner
Smithers, Waldron


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hacking, Rt. Hon Douglas H.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Hanbury, C.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Haslam, Henry C.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Henderson, Capt, R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)
Train, J.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Butler, R. A.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt.R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Wells, Sydney R.


Coltox, Major William Philip
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Muirhead, A. J.
Womersley, W. J.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Penny, Sir George



Davies, Maj.Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Dixey, A. C.
Ramsbotham, H.
Sir Joseph Lamb and Mr. A. A. Somerville.


Lords Amendment to Commons Amendment agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (No. 4) BILL.

Order for Third Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Captain CROOKSHANK: I do not think we can let the Minister of Labour away once again without saying a few words on the Third Reading of a Bill which raises the borrowing powers of the Treasury by £10,000,000. There is a question that I wish to address to her in order to try to rouse the Front Bench from their smug and complacent attitude in dealing with the unemployment problem. In the debate the other day neither the Minister nor the Parliamentary Secretary ever referred to the fact that there are nearly 2,000,000 unemployed. They never mentioned the figures themselves, and all that the Parliamentary Secretary said in winding up the debate was to congratulate the House on the splendid atmosphere in which it had debated the subject; an attitude which I have no doubt he appreciated as compared with that which obtains at party meetings dealing with the subject.
There were during the course of the debate two different sets of questions put to the Minister, none of which was answered by the Parliamentary Secretary. The first was the stream of criticisms and suggestions which was admirably exemplified in one of the best speeches this Parliament has yet heard by the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Owen), who
sits on the Liberal Benches. It was full of constructive suggestions. I do not say that I agree with them all, but none of them was even alluded to by the Parliamentary Secretary. The second stream of criticism was directed from all quarters of the House to the dangers of this system of borrowing and the question of the proper relationship of benefits to contributions, and so on.
I should have thought that the Minister would have been at once on her feet to tell us exactly what has occurred since that occasion, because from a speech which the leader of the Opposition made in the country during the week-end I gather that a committee of some sort has been set up on which there are representatives of the Government, the Conservative Opposition, and the Liberal party, and no announcement 50 far as I know has been made in this House with regard to that committee. I suggest that before we part with this Bill the right hon. Lady should tell us who are the members of that committee, what are their terms of reference, and, more important, what are their status. Are they merely advisory to this House or to the Government? Surely that is one of the things which has emanated from the debate, and I submit that even at this hour the Minister should do the House the courtesy of telling us exactly what she has in mind, and I hope that I have created an opportunity for her to do so.

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Miss Bondfield): I am sure the House will absolve me from any intention of discourtesy. The House is aware of the situation under which this Bill was introduced. With regard to the remarks of the hon. and gallant Gentleman, it is
perfectly true, and I am very happy to be able to announce it, that both Opposition parties in the House have agreed to appoint two Members to work with the Government on various suggestions, not only those that were thrown out in debate, but various other suggestions. This is an Advisory Committee to the Cabinet, and, as such, its proceedings will consequentially be secret. I express my deep satisfaction that these consultations are taking place on this most difficult subject which I think most people believe can be solved, not on party lines, but on lines of what is best for the unemployed. I think that the House will believe that we are following up those suggestions that were made in debate, not only with regard to the financial basis of the Bill but other points which were raised in that debate.

Sir B. PETO: What are the names of the Members?

Captain CROOKSHANK: May I ask the Minister if she will answer that question?

Miss BONDFIELD: Hon. Members will get the names from their party.

Captain CROOKSHANK: If it is a committee of Members, surely the House is entitled to have it on record what the committee is to do.

Mr. McSHANE: I had not intended to speak at this hour, but the remarks of the right hon. Lady have compelled me to rise to my feet. I am certainly surprised to know that, in dealing with unemployment insurance, we are told that it can only be solved on non-party lines.

An HON. MEMBER: You cannot solve it.

Mr. McSHANE: I am speaking, not of unemployment but of unemployment insurance. I am surprised to know that our party will accept, as by implication I suppose we shall be compelled to accept, the same scale of unemployment pay presumably as the party opposite will be prepared to give. The second point I want to make is that I regard with very grave suspicion any attempt to separate unemployment insurance and national relief. We know what that distinction will ultimately lead to,
and it is only for the purpose of expressing in advance my opposition to that that I have risen.

ROAD TRAFFIC BILL [Lords].

Lords Amendments to Commons Amendments and Lords Reasons for disagreeing to certain Commons Amendments considered.

Message from the Lords:

The Lords disagree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 22, line 19,

Leave out ("either") and insert:

"(a) to carry a heavy locomotive; or

(b) to carry a light locomotive; or and to the Amendments made by the Commons in page 22, line 34.

Leave out ("either") and insert:

(" (a) by a heavy locomotive; or

(b) by a heavy locomotive or a light locomotive; or

(c) ")

for the following Reason:—

Because in the form in which the clause stands a specific reference to heavy locomotives and light locomotives is unnecessary.

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Herbert Morrison): I beg to move, "That this House doth not insist upon its Amendments to which the Lords have disagreed."

The Amendments are largely Amendments of form which are acceptable to the Government.

Message from the Lords:

They agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 22, line 38.

At end insert "and shall not exceed the maximum weight permitted for the time being for a heavy motor-car drawing a trailer.

For the purposes of this section the expression placed in a proper position' means placed in such a position either on or near the bridge or on or near the road leading to the bridge as
to be visible at a reasonable distance from the bridge to the drivers of vehicles approaching it, and the highway authority of any such road shall give to the bridge authority reasonable facilities for placing thereon any such notice as aforesaid."

But propose to amend it as follows:

In line 2, leave out "maximum weight permitted for the time being for a heavy motor-car drawing a trailer" and insert "aggregate of the maximum weights permitted for the time being for a heavy locomotive and the trailers drawn thereby when crossing a bridge."

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment to the Commons Amendment."

Again, this is largely a matter of drafting.

Message from the Lords:

They agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 41, to insert new Clause C (Provisions with respect to the transfer of toll bridges and toll roads to local authorities), but propose to amend it as follows:

In Sub-section 3, line 5, leave out "subject, however, to the modification that the arbitrator shall have no regard to any increase in the revenue from tolls due to the construction of new bridges or roads, or the improvement of existing bridges or roads, by any highway authority since the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty."

Mr. SPEAKER: I have to point out to the House that this involves a question of Privilege, because the local authority may have to pay more on account of it.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment to the Commons Amendment."
I am bound to say that I think it is regrettable that this Amendment has been made to the Amendment that this House has made. It will undoubtedly tend to increase the amount of compensation that will be paid by the highway authority in taking over a toll highway or toll bridge, and to that extent it
will make it more difficult to secure action on their part. But I am exceedingly anxious to be conciliatory as far as I can in connection with this Bill at this late stage of the Session. There is another Amendment which we shall be considering later which is exceedingly important, and, in view of our anxiety to secure the passage of the Bill as early as we can, I venture to move "That this House doth agree with the Lords Amendment to the Commons Amendment."

Mr. SPEAKER: I will cause a special entry to be made in the Journals of the House.

Message from the Lords:

They agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 58, line 8.

At end insert—

(" (b) of any financial interest (whether as a partner or shareholder or as a result of any loan, guarantee, or other financial transaction) which any other person providing passenger transport facilities has in the business of the applicant or holder of the licence, and in the case of the applicant or holder who is a company of any right which any such person as aforesaid has to nominate any director of the company;

(c) of any such interest or right as aforesaid which the applicant or holder has in the business of any other person who provides passenger transport facilities within the area of the commissioners.")

But propose to amend it as follows:

After "facilities" in paragraph (G), line 5, insert "or controlling (either solely or in conjunction with any other person) the business of any person who provides such facilities."

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment to the Commons Amendment."
It will have been observed that there is a misprint on the printed form. The word "wholly" should be "solely," and I understand that it has been put in that form. This is to make somewhat more clear the provision as to declara-
tion of interest of one road transport company in another, and the Government agrees to the Amendment.

Message from the Lords:

They disagree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 66, to insert new Clause J. (Wages and conditions of employment of persons employed in connection with public service vehicles) for the following reason:

Because in the absence of special circumstances and of the opportunity of full consideration of a novel precedent the fair wages resolution should not be applied by statute to private enterprise,

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON: I beg to move, "That this House doth insist on its Amendment to which the Lords have disagreed."
I am bound to say that I think it is a matter of some surprise that their Lordships' House should have disagreed with this House on this new Clause which was introduced into the Bill. The new Clause was agreed to upstairs in Committee without a Division, and, although the right hon. Member for New Forest and Christchurch (Colonel Ashley), the late Minister of Transport, asked sue to examine it between the Committee stage and the Report stage, I did so and compared it with the provisions of Clause 19 and came to the conclusion that the Clause ought to remain. It will be within the recollection of the House that this Clause was not challenged on the Report stage except that the hon. and gallant Member for Abingdon (Major Glyn) brought forward a proposal for a statement as to what the fair wages condition was. It was merely a matter of wording and that proposal was withdrawn. The Clause was unanimously assented to in Committee and not in any way challenged in the House itself on the Report stage. It will be seen that the House has passed the Clause without the slightest opposition.
It is right that I should explain briefly the purpose of the Clause. It is argued by the House of Lords—[Interruption]. I am sorry, but I really know what I am doing; hon. Members who interrupt must see the necessity, and a great body of workmen do see the necessity, of the
case being stated. It is argued that this is an interference with the freedom of private enterprise. As a matter of fact, there are precedents far this provision in one of the Housing Acts and in the Beet-Sugar Acts. It has been the custom to insert a fair wages clause in Government contracts. We have to face the fact that we are setting up, partly in the hands of municipalities and partly in those of companies, a monopoly of road transport, and it is right that between one transport operator and another there shall be reasonably fair competition. It is fair to the great bulk of employers that they shall not be cut out by employers who impose bad conditions. Further, the great body of public servants who conduct and drive the services should be efficient, properly fed, and working under reasonable conditions. That is necessary and desirable in the interests of the service itself, and, indeed, in the interests of public safety. When the Bill was introduced originally in another place, we had words in that laid it down that the Commission in granting licences should have regard to the ability of the public servants to do their work and also to economy and efficiency. Those words were intended to cover something like this, but they were vague, and, after discussion, it was decided to attach a wages Clause to the Bill. We are supported by the Royal Commission on Transport. In paragraph 130 of their report they say:
We also recommend that the commissioners should be empowered to attach conditions relating to hours, wages, and conditions of service. We consider that these matters may have in many cases a direct bearing on the safety of the public.
Having regard to the fact that this Clause was carried in Committee with unanimous assent and without a Division, and having regard to the fact that it was not challenged on the Report stage, I earnestly trust that the House of Commons, which has always had a fair regard for the fair wages clause, will unanimously support me in my Motion that this House insist on its Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: I am glad that the Minister has moved to disagree with the Lords in this respect. Undoubtedly, there has been in the past, and still is, a great deal of labour engaged in this transportation work which is underpaid, and this
Amendment will not harm the good employer but simply bring up the bad employer.
Question put, and agreed to.

Message from the Lords:

They agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in page 71, line 4.

At end insert:

"(d) The provisions of subsections (4), (5), (6) and (8) of section eighty-nine shall hare effect subject to the provisions of subsection (11) of section one hundred, and nineteen of this Act;

(e) In the application of section ninety a reference to the council of a county or burgh shall be substituted for any reference to the local authority of a county borough or county district."

But propose to amend it as follows:

In paragraph (e), line 3, leave out "local authority" and insert Council."

Committee appointed to draw up a Reason to be assigned to the Lords for
insisting on one of the Amendments to which the Lords have disagreed.

Committee nominated of Mr. Ernest Brown, Mr. Charles Edwards, Mr. Hanbury, Mr. Herbert Morrison and Mr. W. R. Smith.

Three to be the quorum.—[Mr. Herbert Morrison.]

To withdraw immediately.

Reason for insisting on one Amendment to which the Lords have disagreed reported, and agreed to.

To be communicated to the Lords.—[Mr. Herbert Morrison.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Monday evening, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order.

Adjourned at Five Minutes after Two o'Clock.